Subject: Re: [lisp] [IANA #544148] Document Action: 'Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)' to Experimental RFC (draft-ietf-lisp-22.txt)

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 14:41:47 -0700

CC'ing the rfc-editor and the LISP working group.

> Dear Authors:

Thanks for the email Michelle. See comments inline. We have a proposed draft-ietf-lisp-23 enclosed with a html diff file to reflect your comments. See attachments at the end.

> ATTENTION: A RESPONSE TO THIS MESSAGE IS NEEDED 
> 
> We have completed the IANA Actions for RFC-to-be
> draft-ietf-lisp-22.txt
> 
> We have created three new registries:
> 
> (1)
> LISP ACT values
> Registration Procedures IETF Review or IESG Approval
> Reference  [RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 
> Value 	Action 	Description 	Reference 
> 0	No-Action	The map-cache is kept alive and no packet encapsulation occurs.	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 1	Natively-Forward	Natively-Forward The packet is not encapsulated or dropped but natively 
> forwarded.	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 2	Send-Map-Request	The packet invokes sending a Map-Request.	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 3	Drop	A packet that matches this map-cache entry is dropped. An ICMP Unreachable message 
> SHOULD be sent.	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 4-7	Unassigned	

This is correct and accurate from my point of view.

> (2)
> LISP Address Type Codes
> Reference  [RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 
> Range 	Registration Procedures 
> 0-127	IETF Review or IESG Approval
> 128-255	First Come First Served
> 
> Value 	Description 	Reference 
> 0-255	Unassigned	

This is correct and accurate from my point of view.

> (3)
> LISP Key ID Numbers
> Registration Procedures  TBD
> Reference  [RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 
> Value 	Description 	Reference 
> 0	None	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 1	HMAC-SHA-1-96	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 2	HMAC-SHA-256-128	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 3	Drop	[RFC-ietf-lisp-22]
> 4-65535	Unassigned	

The Drop line should be moved and the last line should be "3-65535". I think you might had a cut-and-paste error from item (1) above.

> Review the new registries carefully to make sure everything is accurate.
> 
> Please see:
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/lisp-parameters/lisp-parameters.xml
> 
> NOTE:  We are still waiting for the Authors to confirm what the registration procedures should be for the 
> "TBD" currently listed in the registry.

See attached draft. Note to rfc-editor.

> We have also updated the references for the udp port numbers described in the document:
> 
> lisp-data	     4341  udp	  LISP Data Packets	
> 								
> lisp-control  4342   udp	  LISP Data-Triggered Control	

The lisp-control line should be labeled "LISP Control Packets".

> Please see:
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xml
> 
> Please let us know whether the above IANA Actions look OK. As 
> soon as we receive your confirmation, we'll notify the RFC Editor 
> that this document's IANA Actions are complete. (If this document 
> has a team of authors, one reply on behalf of everyone will suffice.)
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michelle Cotton
> Manager, IANA Services
> ICANN

Thanks for the attention. Please let us know if you need anything else.

Dino/Vince/Darrel/Dave