[Pce] Re: Adoption Poll of draft-dhody-pce-iana-update

[Dhruv Dhody <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 3:18 PM Aijun Wang <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi, Dhruv:
>
>
>> 2)     Should the table 2 in section 3, add one line to describe the
>> Error-Type 0-251, and their corresponding Error-Value?
>>
> And note that the practice of maintaining two tables is a standard
> practice as seen at
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-messages
>
>
> [WAJ] This is what exactly I want to suggest. This draft will update
> RFC5440, the newly added table shouldn’t only cover the newly assigned type
> range.
>
>
Dhruv: IMHO providing IANA with text instructions is fine. This is what we
did in RFC 8356 as well.

We plan to get an early review from the IANA and we can ask them if they
are happy with the current text. Thanks again for your review.

I will upload -01 in datatracker.

Thanks!
Dhruv



> Thanks!
> Dhruv
>
>
>
>> Best Regards
>>
>>
>>
>> Aijun Wang
>>
>> China Telecom
>>
>>
>>
>> *发件人:* [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> *代表 *Dhruv Dhody
>> *发送时间:* 2024年8月22日 11:42
>> *收件人:* [e-mail]
>> *抄送:* [e-mail];
>> [e-mail]
>> *主题:* [Pce] Re: Adoption Poll of draft-dhody-pce-iana-update
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi WG,
>>
>>
>>
>> Please find a proposed update that merges
>> draft-farrel-pce-experimental-errors -
>> https://ietf-wg-pce.github.io/draft-ietf-pce-iana-update/draft-ietf-pce-iana-update.html
>>
>> Diff:
>> https://author-tools.ietf.org/api/iddiff?doc_1=draft-ietf-pce-iana-update&url_2=https://ietf-wg-pce.github.io/draft-ietf-pce-iana-update/draft-ietf-pce-iana-update.txt
>>
>>
>>
>> Please let us know if you have an objection to this update. Authors will
>> post the revision in the datatracker next week and will request Julien to
>> move this I-D quickly.
>>
>> Feel free to also provide your comments and edits.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Dhruv & Adrian
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 2:59 PM <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We have clear support and no objection on adopting this small I-D: it is
>> now a PCE WG item.
>>
>> @Authors: please re-submit the draft as draft-ietf-pce-iana-update-00.
>>
>> @Authors of draft-farrel-pce-experimental-errors: please talk to the
>> authors of the aforementioned I-D to consider adding your proposal as a
>> contribution into this new WG effort.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Julien
>>
>>
>> Le 30/07/2024 à 10:36, [e-mail] a écrit :
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > In his review of the "native IP" draft, John suggested to consider
>> > adjusting to "IETF Review" the allocation policy of some of the PCEP
>> > registries currently using "Standards Action". Dhruv has submitted
>> > draft-dhody-pce-iana-update to quickly resolve this concern and bring
>> > higher consistency among PCEP registries.
>> >
>> > As a result, does the WG support the adoption of
>> > draft-dhody-pce-iana-update [1] as a WG item? Please, share your
>> > feedback using the PCE mailing list and include your rationale in case
>> > you're opposed.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Julien
>> >
>> >
>> > [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dhody-pce-iana-update/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pce mailing list -- [e-mail]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>
>>