Re: [Pals] Brian Haberman's No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal-05: (with COMMENT)

Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> Wed, 16 September 2015 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <stbryant@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D83A1B40BD; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:35:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 YQG-JWvULhLf; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:35:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F013B1B40C1; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5345; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1442424937; x=1443634537; h=reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=rmOLgOQVgMBa+TjYk+PzA1IzDDSjxRbcdOOZP1VT4qY=; b=FeJFLGICLz/6TR+L5sS+ljKZH5iMtewDzHVSVQVsAI/Q8ugbBbVqUDJO 5Q2DaRJTu98eGY+TUZq2o7ONDKrLALONOM4MD1k9oMzV5dp9wyUzT5B8x LDphHsbs0S60+pDGTLnop/1bBeDtbTJtCXL2VZv3sWjDsjjQUKH/HeC5g A=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,540,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="629769555"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Sep 2015 17:35:35 +0000
Received: from [64.103.106.124] (dhcp-bdlk10-data-vlan300-64-103-106-124.cisco.com [64.103.106.124]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t8GHZZlr030014; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:35:35 GMT
References: <20150914130425.18323.86897.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <55F96141.1020707@cisco.com> <55F9624F.7080202@innovationslab.net>
To: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
From: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <55F9A892.2090506@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 18:36:18 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55F9624F.7080202@innovationslab.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030904080006040606030502"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pals/AE8mL3PMuqUDM8ANPr3B5qt2EZc>
Cc: matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com, draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal.ad@ietf.org, draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal.shepherd@ietf.org, pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pals] Brian Haberman's No Objection on draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal-05: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com
List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." <pals.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pals>, <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pals/>
List-Post: <mailto:pals@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals>, <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:35:43 -0000

On 16/09/2015 13:36, Brian Haberman wrote:
> Hi Stewart,
>
> On 9/16/15 8:32 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>> On 14/09/2015 14:04, Brian Haberman wrote:
>>> Brian Haberman has entered the following ballot position for
>>> draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal-05: No Objection
>>>
>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>>>
>>>
>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-vccv-for-gal/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> COMMENT:
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Is there a particular reason to request that the assigned MPLS VCCV CC
>>> Type be bit 3?
>>>
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>> This is carried in a  bit field - one bit per CC type so that the
>> receiving PE can
>> determine the set of CC types that its peer can support. The three previous
>> types used bit 0, 1, 2. It was therefore tidy if this used bit 3.
>>
>> Please see:
>>
>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/pwe3-parameters/pwe3-parameters.xhtml#pwe3-parameters-11
>>
>>
>> and look for
>>
>> MPLS VCCV Control Channel (CC) Types
> Yes, I understand all that.  However, we generally do not direct IANA to
> use a specific value.  Documents should request the allocation of a
> value from that registry and IANA will determine the assigned value.
>
> Regards,
> Brian
>
>
Hi Brian,

The text says:

"It is requested that Bit 3 be assigned to this purpose which would have a value of 0x08."

That is a request, and not a direction, and it is quite common for the WG responsible
for a protocol to provide this sort of guidance to IANA.

- Stewart