<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<!DOCTYPE rfc [
  <!ENTITY nbsp    "&#160;">
  <!ENTITY zwsp   "&#8203;">
  <!ENTITY nbhy   "&#8209;">
  <!ENTITY wj     "&#8288;">
]>

<rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" submissionType="IETF" category="std" consensus="true" docName="draft-ietf-grow-bmp-registries-change-04" number="9515" ipr="trust200902" updates="7854" obsoletes="" xml:lang="en" tocInclude="true" tocDepth="4" symRefs="true" sortRefs="true" version="3">

  <!-- xml2rfc v2v3 conversion 3.18.0 -->

  <!-- ***** FRONT MATTER ***** -->

  <front>
    <title abbrev="BMP TLV Registration Procedures">
    Revision to Registration Procedures for Multiple BMP Registries</title>
    <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9515"/>

    <author fullname="John Scudder" initials="J." surname="Scudder">
      <organization>Juniper Networks</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>1194 N. Mathilda Ave</street>

          <city>Sunnyvale</city>
          <region>CA</region>
          <code>94089</code>
          <country>United States of America</country>
        </postal>
        <email>jgs@juniper.net</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <date year="2023" month="December" />
    <!-- Meta-data Declarations -->
    <area>ops</area>
    <workgroup>grow</workgroup>
    <keyword>IDR</keyword>
    <abstract>
      <t>
	This document updates RFC 7854, "BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP)", by
	changing the registration procedures for several registries.
	Specifically, any BMP registry with a range of 32768-65530 designated
	"Specification Required" has that range redesignated as "First Come
	First Served".
</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
    <section anchor="introduction" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Introduction</name>
      <t>
	<xref target="RFC7854" format="default"/> creates a number of IANA registries that
	include a range of 32768-65530 designated "Specification Required".
	Each such registry also has a large range designated "Standards
	Action". Subsequent experience has shown two things. First, there is
	less difference between these two policies in practice than there is in
	theory (consider that <xref target="RFC8126" format="default"/> explains that for
	Specification Required, "Publication of an RFC is an ideal means of
	achieving this requirement"). Second, it's desirable to have a very low
	bar to registration, to avoid the risk of conflicts introduced by use
	of unregistered code points (so-called "code point squatting"). 
</t>
      <t>
	Accordingly, this document revises the registration procedures, as given
	in <xref target="IANA" format="default"/>.
</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="IANA" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>IANA Considerations</name>
      <t>
	IANA has revised the following registries within the BMP
	group:
</t>
      <ul spacing="compact">
        <li>BMP Statistics Types</li>
        <li>BMP Initiation and Peer Up Information TLVs</li>
        <li>BMP Termination Message TLVs</li>
        <li>BMP Termination Message Reason Codes</li>
        <li>BMP Route Mirroring TLVs</li>
        <li>BMP Route Mirroring Information Codes</li>
      </ul>
      <t>
	For each of these registries, the ranges 32768-65530 whose registration
	procedures were "Specification Required" are revised to have the 
	registration procedures "First Come First Served".
</t>
    </section>
    <section anchor="Security" numbered="true" toc="default">
      <name>Security Considerations</name>
      <t>
	This revision to registration procedures does not change the
	underlying security issues inherent in <xref target="RFC7854" format="default"/>.
</t>
    </section>

  </middle>
  <!--  *****BACK MATTER ***** -->

  <back>
    <references>
      <name>Normative References</name>
<xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7854.xml"/>
<xi:include href="https://bib.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8126.xml"/>

    </references>
    <section anchor="Acknowledgements" numbered="false" toc="default">
      <name>Acknowledgements</name>
      <t>
	Thanks to <contact fullname="Jeff Haas"/> for review and encouragement, and to <contact fullname="Tom Petch"/>
	for review.
</t>
    </section>
  </back>
</rfc>
