Subject: [mpls] AD review of draft-ietf-mpls-psc-updates

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:43:50 -0000

All,

I have done my usual AD review of this document on receiving the
publication request. I find this to be a clear and functional
document. Thanks to Eric for holding the pen and to the reviewers
or their input.

The only comments I have are, I believe, already in hand with Eric.

After these updates the Shepherd write-up will need to be updated 
because there will be an additional update to 6378, and there will be
an IANA action document.

Similarly, the text of the I-D that talks about the number of updates
will need to be updated.

I'll put the document into "Revised I-D Needed" state and wait for the
next version.

Thanks for the work,
Adrian

=======

Per my earlier email (fixed for the typo):

> A couple of discussion points on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-psc-itu (which is
> currently in IESG evaluation) have given rise to two small proposed 
> additions to draft-ietf-mpls-psc-updates
>
> 1. I think this warrants a very small section of its own...
>
> x.y  PSC TLV Format
>
>   [RFC6378] defines the capability to carry TLVs in the PSC messages.
>   This section defines the format to be used by all such TLVs.
>
>   Type field (T)
>      A two octet field that encodes a type value in network byte 
>      order. The type values are recorded in the IANA registry "MPLS
>      PSC TLV Registry".
>
>   Length field (L)
>      A two octet field that encodes the length in octets of the Value
>      field in network byte order. The value of this field MUST be a 
>      multiple of 4.
>                                                                           
>   Value field (V)
>      The contents of the TLV. This field MUST be a multiple of 4 
>      octets and so may contain explicit padding.
>
> 2. There was a trivial snafu with the 0 value in the "MPLS PSC TLV
> Registry". It was agreed that 0 would be reserved, but this was not
> recorded in RFC 6378. Therefore, the IANA section of draft-ietf-mpls-
> psc-updates should include the text...
>
> IANA is requested to mark the value 0 in the "MPLS PSC TLV Registry"
> as "Reserved, not to be allocated" and to update the references to 
> show [RFC6378] and [This.I-D].  Note that this action provides
> documentation of an action already taken by IANA but not recorded in
> RFC 6378.

---

Would be nice to fix the nits from idnits in the next revision.