Skip to main content

IANA Registries for LSP Ping Code Points
RFC 7537

Yes

(Adrian Farrel)

No Objection

(Alia Atlas)
(Benoît Claise)
(Brian Haberman)
(Jari Arkko)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Kathleen Moriarty)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Richard Barnes)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Ted Lemon)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 02 and is now closed.

Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (for -02)

                            
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2015-03-05 for -02)
Pete's comments make perfect sense to me, too.  That said, I think Section 2.2 is not wrong and not confusing the way it is, so it's not a big deal either way (if I had to be picky, I'd say that with respect to the specification of the registration policy at the top of the section, 5226 uses "Experimental Use", not "Experimental" ("Experimental" is for labelling the code points, as later in the section); but I would never be so picky).
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2015-03-03 for -02)
It's not at all clear to me why this document is going for Standards Track or why it updates 4379 and 6424, nor does the ballot nor shepherd writeup explain. It's creating a registry, which doesn't change the protocol in either of those documents. Seems to me fine that it be Informational, and that it doesn't update anything.

2.2, 2.3, 2.4:

OLD
   The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry are:

      0-250    Standards Action
    251-254    Experimental
        255    Standards Action
NEW
   The registration policies [RFC5226] for this registry is Standards
   Action.

The registration policy for the entire registry is "Standards Action". Within the registry itself, the values 251-254 should be marked Experimental (which they are) and 255 should be marked Reserved (which it is), but that doesn't change the registration policy.
Richard Barnes Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2015-03-04 for -02)
Pete's comments make perfect sense to me.
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)

                            
Ted Lemon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -02)