Hi Tom, Thanks for catching this, sorry I missed it in my review. The registry is now named "IS-IS Sub-TLVs for Application-Specific SRLG TLV”, so,
OLD: 7.5. Sub-TLVs for TLV 238 Registry IANA has created a new registry titled "Sub-TLVs for TLV 238" under the "IS-IS TLV Codepoints" registry to control the assignment of sub- NEW: 7.5. Sub-TLVs for IS-IS Sub-TLVs for Application-Specific SRLG TLV Registry IANA has created a new registry titled "IS-IS Sub-TLVs for Application-Specific SRLG TLV" under the "IS-IS TLV Codepoints" registry to control the assignment of sub- Authors, can you please make the revision when you publish the next version? Thanks, —John > On Apr 20, 2023, at 6:41 AM, tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com> wrote: > > > From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of The IESG > <iesg-secret...@ietf.org> > Sent: 19 April 2023 21:01 > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: cho...@chopps.org; draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8919...@ietf.org; j...@juniper.net; > lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr@ietf.org > Subject: [Lsr] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8919bis-00.txt> (IS-IS > Application-Specific Link Attributes) to Proposed Standard > The IESG has received a request from the Link State Routing WG (lsr) to > consider the following document: - 'IS-IS Application-Specific Link > Attributes' > <draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8919bis-00.txt> as Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final > comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > last-c...@ietf.org mailing lists by 2023-05-03. Exceptionally, comments may > be sent to i...@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning > of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > <tp> > " IANA has created a new registry titled "Sub-TLVs for TLV 238" under > the "IS-IS TLV Codepoints" registry to control the assignment > " > > When I go to the IANA website I see lots of I S - I S under which it might > be but not that particular one. What is it by another name? > > Tom Petch > > Abstract > > > Existing traffic-engineering-related link attribute advertisements > have been defined and are used in RSVP-TE deployments. Since the > original RSVP-TE use case was defined, additional applications (e.g., > Segment Routing Policy and Loop-Free Alternates) that also make use > of the link attribute advertisements have been defined. In cases > where multiple applications wish to make use of these link > attributes, the current advertisements do not support application- > specific values for a given attribute, nor do they support indication > of which applications are using the advertised value for a given > link. This document introduces new link attribute advertisements > that address both of these shortcomings. > > This document obsoletes RFC 8919. > > > > > The file can be obtained via > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-rfc8919bis/__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!H--jQXaGBKyUh1Ji8-0I02I_lK5h848xPJFQqyeHphMG17NBjPpu__ABg4byU4qG2GbHgH-66efP5g$ > > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > Lsr@ietf.org > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!H--jQXaGBKyUh1Ji8-0I02I_lK5h848xPJFQqyeHphMG17NBjPpu__ABg4byU4qG2GbHgH8CiymDMA$ _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
