[rsvp-dir] Consideration of Experimental CTypes

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

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