Re: [mpls] Poll for draft on EXP Bits to WG draft

[George Swallow <swallow at cisco.com>]

Huub -

Apparently I mis-spoke.  The "Updated by" annotations only go into the
rfc-index.  The new rfc will carry an annotation say "Updates ..." where ...
Is a list of the affected RFCs.

...George


On 5/8/08 5:04 PM, "George Swallow" <swallow at cisco.com> wrote:

> Huub -
> 
> Generally the IETF does not respin an RFC to incorporate changes such as
> these as the overhead of doing so is high given the approval process.
> Instead, on the cover page of the RFCs affected by the change, a note is
> made saying
> 
> Updated by RFCxxxx.
> 
> Where RFCxxxx would be the number given to this.
> 
> ...George
> 
> 
> On 5/7/08 5:32 AM, "Huub van Helvoort" <h.v.helvoort at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hello George,
>> 
>> You wrote:
>> 
>>> This begins a one week poll to determine support for making
>>> 
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/mpls/draft-andersson-mpls-expbits-def-00.txt
>>> 
>>> a WG doc.
>>> 
>>> As background, early in the MPLS work, these bits were always intend for
>>> various uses as COS bits and other functions imbedded in the DS byte of the
>>> IP header.  They were called experimental only in that, at the time the
>>> encaps draft was written, there was no consensus on what to do with the
>>> bits.
>>> 
>>> The term experimental has lead various people and SDOs to expect more
>>> freedom in defining these bits than ever was intended.  This draft seeks to
>>> correct that.
>> 
>> I support this, especially regarding the last paragraph.
>> 
>> Will RFCs that use these bits also be updated to refer to this
>> definition?
>> 
>> Cheers, Huub.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls