[OSPF] [IANA #992646] FW: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-10

"Amanda Baber via RT" <iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org> Fri, 15 December 2017 00:55 UTC

Return-Path: <iana-shared@icann.org>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A5D126C3D for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:55:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6mVJhYZvJTYH for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:55:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp01.icann.org (smtp01.icann.org [192.0.46.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C10F21200F3 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:55:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from request3.lax.icann.org (request1.lax.icann.org [10.32.11.221]) by smtp01.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3AC5E0587; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:55:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by request3.lax.icann.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id B276CC20667; Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:55:08 +0000 (UTC)
RT-Owner: amanda.baber
From: Amanda Baber via RT <iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org>
Reply-To: iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org
In-Reply-To: <5A323BC6.80209@cisco.com>
References: <RT-Ticket-992646@icann.org> <151319505743.30097.13501863117618500315.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <D6573193.E1585%acee@cisco.com> <5A323BC6.80209@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <rt-4.2.9-7308-1513299308-1061.992646-9-0@icann.org>
X-RT-Loop-Prevention: IANA
X-RT-Ticket: IANA #992646
X-Managed-BY: RT 4.2.9 (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/)
X-RT-Originator: amanda.baber@icann.org
CC: ospf@ietf.org, ppsenak@cisco.com, shraddha@juniper.net, pushpasis.ietf@gmail.com, hannes@gredler.at, mnanduri@ebay.com, luay.jalil@verizon.com, acee@cisco.com, akr@cisco.com, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, db3546@att.com, akatlas@gmail.com, acee@cisco.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-RT-Original-Encoding: utf-8
Precedence: bulk
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:55:08 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/KObbgF-njU_mCnLrRZkTLL6ljGw>
Subject: [OSPF] [IANA #992646] FW: Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-10
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:55:12 -0000

Hi all,

As Peter pointed out, there appear to be issues with these registrations. 

Is the first registry, "OSPF Extended Link TLVs Registry," meant to refer to  "OSPFv2 Extended Link Opaque LSA TLVs" or "OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV Sub-TLVs"? In the first of those, values 4, 5, and 11 are available. In the second, values 4 and 5 are not available. Please see

https://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv2-parameters

For the second registry in the document, if "OSPFV3 Router Link TLV Registry" refers to "OSPFv3 Router LSA Link Types," value 4 is not available. Please see

https://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv3-parameters

For the third registry in the document, if "BGP-LS Link NLRI Registry" refers to "BGP-LS NLRI-Types," value 1101 is available, but because this is a Specification Required registry, we'll have to ask the designated experts to confirm that this is OK. Can you confirm that this is the correct registry?

https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-ls-parameters

You can see a list of registries here:

https://www.iana.org/protocols

thanks,

Amanda Baber
Lead IANA Services Specialist

On Thu Dec 14 08:52:23 2017, ppsenak@cisco.com wrote:
> Hi Acee,
> 
> On 14/12/17 01:39 , Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> > Please provide allocations for the code points in
> > draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-10.txt:
> >
> >   OSPF Extended Link TLVs Registry
> 
> more precisely, these should be allocated from "OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV 
> Sub-TLVs" registry. The text in the draft should be updated as well to 
> reflect the correct registry name. At this point it says "OSPF Extended 
> Link TLVs Registry", which would suggest it is from a different, top 
> level TLV registry.
> 
> Also I see that value 5 has been taken by RFC8169 already.
> 
> thanks,
> Peter
> 
> >
> >     i) Link-Overload sub-TLV - Suggested value 5
> >
> >     ii) Remote IPv4 address sub-TLV - Suggested value 4
> >
> >     iii) Local/Remote Interface ID sub-TLV - Suggested Value 11
> >
> >     OSPFV3 Router Link TLV Registry
> >
> >     i) Link-Overload sub-TLV - suggested value 4
> >
> >     BGP-LS Link NLRI Registry [RFC7752]
> >
> > i)Link-Overload TLV - Suggested 1101
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Acee
> >
> > On 12/13/17, 2:57 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Acee Lindem has requested publication of draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload-10
> >> as Proposed Standard on behalf of the OSPF working group.
> >>
> >> Please verify the document's state at
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-link-overload/
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OSPF mailing list
> > OSPF@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
> > .
> >
>