[Pce] Re: 答复: New draft to update IANA registration policy

[Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tom,

IANA has made the update to -

Wavelength Restriction TLV Action Values

Registry:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/

Thanks!
Dhruv

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 8:32 PM Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2024 at 5:03 AM tom petch <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Where it says
>> 'This updates
>>     | Wavelength    |  [RFC8780]  |  |
>>     | Restriction     |    |   |
>>     | Constraint TLV  | |   |
>>     | Action Values '
>> Is this the
>> "Wavelength Restriction TLV Action Values" subregistry ]
>> of RFC8780?
>>
>>
> In the IANA page it is called "Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV
> Action Values"
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#wavelength-restriction-constraint-tlv-action-values
>
> RFC 8780 uses "Wavelength Restriction TLV Action Values"
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8780.html#section-8.5
>
> With a little digging I found that the keyword "Constraint" was dropped
> from the TLV name during AUTH48 but the iana was not updated. Let me take
> action on fixing this. Thanks for spotting it!
>
> Thanks!
> Dhruv
>
>
>> Tom Petch
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Aijun Wang <[e-mail]>
>> Sent: 25 July 2024 09:16
>>
>> Hi, Dhruv:
>>
>> Thanks for your quick draft. I think IETF review is enough because the
>> required RFCs needs to be passed all the same stages
>> Although there maybe some different criteria, the related RFCs can assure
>> the interoperability of protocol from different vendors.
>>
>> The document is written clearly. If there is no objection, we can move it
>> faster to be published.
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Aijun Wang
>> China Telecom
>>
>> 发件人: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> 代表 Dhruv Dhody
>> 发送时间: 2024年7月23日 5:19
>> 收件人: [e-mail]
>> 主题: [Pce] New draft to update IANA registration policy
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have written a small draft to update the registration policy for all
>> "standards action" to "IETF review" for PCEP registry.
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dhody-pce-iana-update/
>>
>> The approach that the draft currently takes is to make a blanket change
>> to IETF-review for all "standards action" registry to allow experimental
>> track documents to request allocation. There are some registries where the
>> space is tight but IMHO IETF-review is fine -- our WG and LC process should
>> be enough to handle the case of less bits which ideally require creating a
>> new field/registry as we did in the past for LSP object flags!
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> It might be a good idea to move this quickly as John suggested in his AD
>> review of Native-IP draft [1].
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Dhruv
>>
>> [1]
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/xBn2_9E9vy6h5AnYEMMf3I9vbqM/
>>
>