Instructions for Seamoby and Experimental Mobility Protocol IANA Allocations
RFC 4065
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2015-10-14
|
02 | (System) | Notify list changed from pcalhoun@airespace.com, kempf@docomolabs-usa.com to (None) |
2005-07-13
|
02 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza |
2005-07-13
|
02 | Amy Vezza | [Note]: 'RFC 4065' added by Amy Vezza |
2005-07-08
|
02 | (System) | RFC published |
2004-10-04
|
02 | Allison Mankin | State Change Notice email list have been change to pcalhoun@airespace.com, kempf@docomolabs-usa.com from pcalhoun@bstormnetworks.com, kempf@docomolabs-usa.com |
2004-09-23
|
02 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
2004-09-21
|
02 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
2004-09-21
|
02 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2004-09-21
|
02 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2004-09-21
|
02 | Allison Mankin | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed by Allison Mankin |
2004-07-14
|
02 | Allison Mankin | Note field has been cleared by Allison Mankin |
2004-07-14
|
02 | Allison Mankin | Sent James RFC Editor notes after waiting to see issues from iesg review/re-review of card/ctp. 1. Change the shared SCTP port for CARD and CTP, … Sent James RFC Editor notes after waiting to see issues from iesg review/re-review of card/ctp. 1. Change the shared SCTP port for CARD and CTP, to one each, and have them not use PPI's. The IESG has actually preferred to encourage that SCTP not substitute PPIs for ports, and SCTP ports are not scarce. We missed this point earlier. The text changes for this are (I'll put them in RFC Editor notes on the announcement, no revision needed): OLD: 2.0 Common IPv4 and IPv6 Allocations IANA SHALL assign SCTP port number TBD1 for use by experimental mobility protocols such as Seamoby. See Section 5.2.1 of [CARD] for a description of inter-access router CARD protocol use of SCTP, and Section 3.1 of [CTP] for a description of the inter-access router CTP use of SCTP. IANA SHALL assign SCTP Payload Protocol Identifier (PPI) TBD2, designated "CTP", for the Context Transfer Protocol, and SCTP Payload Protocol Identifier TBD3, designated "CARD", for the Candidate Access Router Discovery protocol. These are used to differentiate inter-router CARD and CTP messages on the SCTP port. The allocation policy for new PPI numbers is the method of IETF Consensus Action. NEW: 2.0 Common IPv4 and IPv6 Allocations IANA SHALL assign SCTP port numbers TBD1 for use by [CARD] and TBD1a for use by [CTP]. See Section 5.2.1 of [CARD] for a description of inter-access router CARD protocol use of SCTP, and Section 3.1 of [CTP] for a description of the inter-access router CTP use of SCTP. OLD: 9.0 Utilization by Other Experimental Mobility Protocols The ICMP Experimental Mobility type code and SCTP port are available for other experimental mobility protocols to utilize. Other experimental mobility protocols MAY define additional ICMP messages that utilize the code points under the Experimental Mobility ICMP type, and MAY define protocols that utilize additional SCTP PPI numbers for the Experimental Mobility protocol por 9.0 Utilization by Other Experimental Mobility Protocols The ICMP Experimental Mobility type code is available for other experimental mobility protocols to utilize. Other experimental mobility protocols MAY define additional ICMP messages that utilize the code points under the Experimental Mobility ICMP type. 2. There's an RFC 2434 mistake, a category that doesn't exist. The only way to guarantee IESG review is the IETF Consensus category; this requires an RFC publication and an IESG review. Text change: OLD: Subsequent allocations of subtype codes SHALL be done by the method of Specification Required and IESG Review as defined in RFC 2434. NEW: Subsequent allocations of subtype codes SHALL be done by the method of IETF Consensus as defined in RFC 2434. |
2004-06-25
|
02 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2004-06-24 |
2004-06-24
|
02 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza |
2004-06-24
|
02 | Thomas Narten | [Ballot comment] > 2.0 Common IPv4 and IPv6 Allocations > > IANA SHALL assign SCTP port number TBD1 for … [Ballot comment] > 2.0 Common IPv4 and IPv6 Allocations > > IANA SHALL assign SCTP port number TBD1 for use by experimental mobility > protocols such as Seamoby. See Section 5.2.1 of [CARD] for a description of resusing the port for multiple applications seems not so good. Why not just assign a port number for CARD and be done with it? > Specification Required and IESG Review as defined in RFC 2434. > IESG Review is not defined in 2434... |
2004-06-24
|
02 | Thomas Narten | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Thomas Narten by Thomas Narten |
2004-06-24
|
02 | Alex Zinin | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alex Zinin by Alex Zinin |
2004-06-24
|
02 | Margaret Cullen | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Margaret Wasserman by Margaret Wasserman |
2004-06-23
|
02 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for David Kessens by David Kessens |
2004-06-23
|
02 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley |
2004-06-23
|
02 | Harald Alvestrand | [Ballot comment] Reviewed by Spencer Dawkins, Gen-ART. Comment worth pulling into ballot: 5.2 - Given that the registry is starting with 8 values, and this … [Ballot comment] Reviewed by Spencer Dawkins, Gen-ART. Comment worth pulling into ballot: 5.2 - Given that the registry is starting with 8 values, and this is just from IEEE 802, I'm wondering if one byte (255 values) leaves enough headroom for the next 20 years. I guess it's BARELY big enough. Yeah, Seamoby is Experimental, but what if the experiment works? But John Loughney responded (on the gen-art list): Strong guidence from the AD & Thomas Narten suggested that this space be left small intentially to avoid potential over extension. However, if the experiment works, then the document will be reved as proposed standard with this fixed, if needed. |
2004-06-23
|
02 | Harald Alvestrand | [Ballot comment] Reviewed by Spencer Dawkins, Gen-ART. Comment worth pulling into ballot: 5.2 - Given that the registry is starting with 8 values, and this … [Ballot comment] Reviewed by Spencer Dawkins, Gen-ART. Comment worth pulling into ballot: 5.2 - Given that the registry is starting with 8 values, and this is just from IEEE 802, I'm wondering if one byte (255 values) leaves enough headroom for the next 20 years. I guess it's BARELY big enough. Yeah, Seamoby is Experimental, but what if the experiment works? |
2004-06-23
|
02 | Harald Alvestrand | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Harald Alvestrand by Harald Alvestrand |
2004-06-18
|
02 | Allison Mankin | [Note]: 'Supports CTP (new on this agenda), CARD (IESG already reviewed). Blue Team ' added by Allison Mankin |
2004-06-18
|
02 | Scott Hollenbeck | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Scott Hollenbeck has been changed to No Objection from Undefined by Scott Hollenbeck |
2004-06-18
|
02 | Scott Hollenbeck | [Ballot comment] It might be helpful if section 12 (IANA Considerations) spelled out the TBD actions that are sprinkled throughout the document instead of just … [Ballot comment] It might be helpful if section 12 (IANA Considerations) spelled out the TBD actions that are sprinkled throughout the document instead of just saying that "This entire document is about IANA considerations". It's easy to miss an action given the way the document is currently written. |
2004-06-18
|
02 | Scott Hollenbeck | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Undefined, has been recorded for Scott Hollenbeck by Scott Hollenbeck |
2004-06-17
|
02 | Allison Mankin | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Allison Mankin |
2004-06-17
|
02 | Allison Mankin | Ballot has been issued by Allison Mankin |
2004-06-17
|
02 | Allison Mankin | Created "Approve" ballot |
2004-06-17
|
02 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
2004-06-17
|
02 | (System) | Last call text was added |
2004-06-17
|
02 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
2004-06-17
|
02 | Allison Mankin | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2004-06-24 by Allison Mankin |
2004-06-17
|
02 | Allison Mankin | [Note]: 'Supports CTP (new on this agenda), CARD (returning).' added by Allison Mankin |
2004-06-17
|
02 | Allison Mankin | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from AD Evaluation::AD Followup by Allison Mankin |
2004-06-09
|
02 | (System) | Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed |
2004-06-09
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-seamoby-iana-02.txt |
2004-05-28
|
02 | Allison Mankin | State Changes to AD Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from AD Evaluation by Allison Mankin |
2004-05-28
|
02 | Allison Mankin | State Change Notice email list have been change to pcalhoun@bstormnetworks.com, kempf@docomolabs-usa.com from pcalhoun@diameter.org, pcalhoun@bstormnetworks.com, kempf@docomolabs-usa.com |
2004-05-28
|
02 | Allison Mankin | State Changes to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested by Allison Mankin |
2004-05-21
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-seamoby-iana-01.txt |
2004-05-14
|
02 | Dinara Suleymanova | Draft Added by Dinara Suleymanova |
2004-05-14
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-seamoby-iana-00.txt |