Kireeti,
Presumably your comments, which I agree with, apply to
draft-lin-ccamp-gmpls-ason-rsvpte-04.txt as well?
Thanks,
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti(_at_)juniper(_dot_)net]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:26 PM
To: iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Last Call: CR-LDP Extensions for ASON to Informational
Hi All,
On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request to consider CR-LDP Extensions for ASON
<draft-aboulmagd-ccamp-crldp-ason-ext-02.txt> as an Informational RFC.
This has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF
Working Group.
I have two comments about this draft.
The first is that the draft calls for assignment of code points for
some new messages, TLVs and status codes. The draft, however, fails
to say from which spaces these should come (e.g., that to be allocated
by IETF Consensus, First Come First Served, Experimental). If this is
not specified, then I would suggest that code points from Experimental
spaces be used.
If code points are to be allocated from the space to be allocated by
IETF Consensus, I strongly suggest that a *Standards Track* document be
written, with more detail on the messages, especially their processing.
Also, more detail on what the goal is here, under what circumstances
these messages need to be sent/replied to, etc.
Kireeti.