Doesn’t this need an IANA section to update https://www.iana.org/assignments/ancp/ancp.xhtml?
Also, some of the registries on that IANA page are marked as Standards Action, so how does that work with Intended status: Experimental. But perhaps the sub-registries being updated are not Standards Action (needs to be checked). While I don’t work with ANCP or know that much about it, looks OK otherwise. - Bernie On Feb 7, 2020, at 3:58 PM, Suresh Krishnan <[email protected]> wrote: Hi all, I am considering AD sponsoring the following draft https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lihawi-ancp-protocol-access-extension-03 that proposes extensions to ANCP (Access Node Control Protocol) that was specified in RFC6320 in order to support PON and some other DSL Technologies including G.fast. If you have any concerns either with the content of the draft, or about me AD sponsoring it please let me know before 2020/02/17. Thanks Suresh NOTE: I have CCed: all the working groups that I thought could be potentially interested in this work. If you think I have missed out some WG(s) please let me know. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
