ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-number-registries-02.txt> (Internet Numbers Registries) to Informational RFC

2014-01-25 10:23:39
Thomas:

Overall, this document looks good. But a couple of suggestions.

As a general comment, I think the document should include a reference
wherever it states what a policy is (as defined elswhere).

  Reservations of special-purpose AS Numbers are made through Internet
  Standards actions.

Citation of where that policy is defined?

I have updated the document; it will be posted as -03.  It now uses "IETF 
Review" throughout.
 
But then later, the document says::

3.  IANA Considerations

  "IETF Review" as defined in [RFC5226] is required to reserve special-
  purpose AS numbers, IPv4 addresses, or IPv6 addresses.  Reserved AS
  numbers, IPv4 addresses, or IPv6 addresses may be designated to
  support testing, IETF experimental activities, or other special uses
  (e.g., anycast).  These reservations are recorded in the relevant

which contradicts the previous statement.

Also, would be good to cite all the individual RFCs when restating
what the policy is for each registries listed above.

I have reworked this as suggested by David Conrad.  It now points to the 
existing IANA registry, which already requires "IETF Review" for additions.

  Reservation of special-purpose IPv4 addresses are made through
  Internet Standards actions.  Reserved IPv4 unicast addresses are
  registered in the Special Purpose IP address registries [RFC6890].

Citation for first sentence?

I have reworked this as suggested by David Conrad.  It now points to the 
existing IANA registry, which already requires "IETF Review" for additions.

  The vast bulk of the IPv6 address space (approximately 7/8ths of the
  whole address space) is reserved by the IETF, with the expectation

For first sentence, cite where that reservation/delegation was made
(i.e., RFC 3513).

Okay.

Russ


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>