[rsvp-dir] Consideration of Experimental CTypes

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Wed, 12 December 2012 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: rsvp-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rsvp-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D9721F8A26; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:09:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.102, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id btZvYEA2kWFd; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:09:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72FDF21F89B5; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:09:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qBCF920c003427; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 15:09:02 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qBCF91bZ003421 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 12 Dec 2012 15:09:02 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <rsvp-dir@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 15:08:59 -0000
Message-ID: <096201cdd87a$9dad1c30$d9075490$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac3Yelk0p48LLB7aTlyI0Hmh1/ybOg==
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: iesg@ietf.org
Subject: [rsvp-dir] Consideration of Experimental CTypes
X-BeenThere: rsvp-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: RSVP directorate <rsvp-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rsvp-dir>, <mailto:rsvp-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rsvp-dir>
List-Post: <mailto:rsvp-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rsvp-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir>, <mailto:rsvp-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 15:09:09 -0000

Hi RSVP-Directorate,

The IESG is looking at draft-kumaki-murai-l3vpn-rsvp-te during IESG evaluation
and post-IESTF last call.

The document is intended to be Experimental, and wants to carry out its
experiment by adding some CTypes to existing CNums. However, the IANA registry
observes...

> For Class Numbers that pre-date [RFC3936] (specifically, 0, 1, 3-25,
> 30-37, 42-45, 64, 65, 128-131, 161-165, 192-196, and 207), the
> default assignment policy for new Class Types is Standards Action,
> unless a Standards Track or Best Current Practice RFC supercedes this.

What is your view of the intention? Is the purpose to block experimentation on
existing CNums? How should experiments be carried out?

An option, I suppose is to replicate the CNums into Experimental CNums and
include the experimental CTypes there.

Thanks,
Adrian