Subject: [Pce] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006bis-03: (with COMMENT)

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 19:49:33 -0700

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006bis-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006bis/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have only reviewed the diffs from RFC6006 (Perhaps we should request tools
support for bis document diffs):
<https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6006.txt&url2=draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006bis-03>

The instructions in section 6.5 only indicate that IANA should update the
document reference. The changes indicated in this section additionally reserve
new values (specifically, the object type of "0" for object classes 28-31). As
these changes are not called out, they run the risk of being overlooked. Please
update the instructions to IANA to indicate that the registered values have
changed, not just the document references.

---

From: Dhruv Dhody <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 06:34:05 +0000

Hi Adam, 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pce [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Adam Roach
> Sent: 30 August 2017 08:20
> To: The IESG <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: [Pce] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006bis-03:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> I have only reviewed the diffs from RFC6006 (Perhaps we should request
> tools support for bis document diffs):
> <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https://www.rfc-
> editor.org/rfc/rfc6006.txt&url2=draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006bis-03>
> 
> document reference. The changes indicated in this section additionally
> reserve new values (specifically, the object type of "0" for object
> classes 28-31). As these changes are not called out, they run the risk of
> being overlooked. Please update the instructions to IANA to indicate that
> the registered values have changed, not just the document references.
> 
[[Dhruv Dhody]] The Object-Type 0 is already marked in the PCEP IANA registry [1] as "reserved", as part of an earlier Errata [2]. 
But you are correct, that the text should be updated to reflect this. 

I have made this change - 

   Also, for the following four PCEP objects, the code-point 0 for the
   Object-Type field are marked "Reserved" with reference to Errata ID
   4956. IANA is requested to update the reference to point to this
   document.

Is that okay?

[1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-objects
[2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=4956

Thanks! 
Dhruv
  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 09:59:37 -0500

>     4956. IANA is requested to update the reference to point to this

Yes. Thanks!

/a