Michael Richardson <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear WG, > We started with two allocation policies: > 1. First Come First Services (50% of numbers) > 2. Specification Required (50% of numbers)
> After some thought, we flipped the two so that the existing allocations,
> which were not consistently Specification Required, would be in FCFS area.
> Then the question was asked, why would anyone go the Spec Required?
> So we merged it all into FCFS, but probably that was too weak, and
> I thought that we could have some softer review. So it's now a mess.
> I suggest we change this from FCFS to Expert Review.
Joe posted a formal call at:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/gmLguHReq94gnICl-NiNuVRgRZs/
Giving Nov.14 as the closing date for objections.
Chairs: will you consider the lack of comment = lack of objection?
https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-WG/draft-ietf-opsawg-pcap/pull/192
What I see as my todo:
Change:
* Values from 0 to 65000 are allocated following a First-Come First-
Served policy (Section 4.4 of [RFC8126]). Values in the ranges
0-10, 50-51, and 98-301 are already assigned; values in the ranges
11-49 and 52-97 are reserved and must not be assigned.
to:
* Values from 0 to 65000 are allocated following an Expert Review
policy (Section 4.5 of [RFC8126]). Values in the ranges
0-10, 50-51, and 98-301 are already assigned; values in the ranges
11-49 and 52-97 are reserved and must not be assigned.
and to put the Advice for Designated Experts back in:
3.2.2. Guidance for Designated Experts
When processing a request for an allocation, the Designated Experts
will encourage the requester to provide a specification at a stable
URL. There is no requirement for a specification, but often review
of the specification allows the Designated Expert to determine if the
allocation actually is a duplicate of another specification.
When the contents of the link type can contain an IPv4 or IPv6
header, then the octets between the beginning of the link type and
the IP header needs to be clear.
Specifications that are not publicly available, but which may be
obtained via liaison agreements (such as to ITU-T, 3GPP, IEEE, etc.)
are acceptable particularly if the specification document will be
public eventually, but are discouraged. For other documents, the
Designated Expert will need use their judgement, or consult the
OPSAWG or an Area Director.
LinkTypes for which specifications are not publicly available may
have values allocated within the FCFS range. This includes
specifications that might be subject to a security classification.
The minimal requirement is to provide a contact person for that link
type.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
