Hi All, I've updated my ballot to reflect the v14 of the document. Thanks for taking care of most of my previous comments.
There is only one point that I consider at a level of DISCUSS - the Change Authority. I believe, IESG/IETF cannot be the change authority for allocations that are being grandfathered-in from open source projects (e.g., libpcap, tcpdump, etc.). IESG/IETF will also not like to be the change controller for new allocations - that should be the person(s) requesting the allocation. Refer https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8126.html#section-2.3 - someone from the IANA team can correct me if I'm wrong. The other non-blocking comment is that Link Type value be made the first entry in the registry table for ease of use. On the matter of DE guidance, this is something that I will leave to the WG. My apologies for not being able to come up with a more concrete suggestion for what seems to rely a lot on the DE's discretion. Thanks, Ketan On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 9:05 AM Mahesh Jethanandani <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Michael, > > Looking at the list of DISCUSS, here is one thing that does not seem to > have been addressed. > > Ketan’s DISCUSS comment: > > > > > > *2) The registry is missing the Change Controller column and filing that > is abit tricky. I believe none of the initial allocations have the IETF as > thechange controller since it comes from the tcpdump/pcap open source code. > Assuch, perhaps that open source project (or the lead > developer/maintainer(s) forit) should become the Change Controllers?* > > In the discussion that followed, Guy seems to have agreed that: > > > *KT> Please identify the Change controllers for all the initial > allocations.* > > > *Michael, would that be just you and me, or would we also include other > tcpdump/libpcap core developers?* > > Currently, the document states that the Change Controller is the IESG > through the DE it appoints. > > Thanks > > > On Nov 24, 2025, at 2:03 PM, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Joe Clarke (jclarke) <[email protected]> wrote: > > [JMC] These changes for DE look good to me. That said, I believe you > have some other PR text pending for the current DISCUSS? > > > I can't think of anything else. > I think it was all taken care of already. > > -- > Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > > > > > > > Mahesh Jethanandani > [email protected] > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
