RE: IESG Comments: <draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-02.txt>

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Great, thanks. 
Will check and if OK, then I think we are done.

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Lang [mailto:Jonathan.Lang@rinconnetworks.com]
> Sent: zondag 14 december 2003 21:35
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Ccamp-wg (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: IESG Comments: <draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-02.txt>
> 
> 
> Thanks Bert,
>   I have made the changes and uploaded the -03 version.  I 
> also noticed
> draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-03.txt needed the same edits, so
> I've updated/uploaded that draft as -04.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jonathan
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org 
> > [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> > Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 5:03 PM
> > To: Ccamp-wg (E-mail)
> > Subject: IESG Comments: <draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-02.txt>
> > 
> > CCAMPers and LMP editors/authors,
> > 
> > I should have seen the below in my AD review. 
> > Appology that I missed it.
> > 
> > ... snip ...
> > 
> > The IANA considerations is not very clear indeed. It was 
> > perceived by IANA (and others) to establish YET another 
> > namespace. The good news is that it does NOT specify a new 
> > namespace. In fact it requests allocation in an existing 
> > namespace as defined in draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-10.txt, which 
> > was approved on Oct 17th.
> > The latter doc does have the appropriate IANA instructions.
> > 
> > So this one can be fixed with:
> > 
> > OLD
> >   6. IANA Considerations
> >   
> >    LMP defines the following name spaces that require management:
> > 
> >    - LMP Message Type.
> >    - LMP Object Class.
> >    - LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class.
> >    - LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the 
> Object Class.
> > 
> >    This memo introduces the following name spaces which need
> >    assignment:
> > 
> >       o CONFIG
> >         - LMP-WDM_CONFIG       (suggested C-Type = 2)
> > 
> >       o CHANNEL_STATUS
> >         - LINK_GROUP           (suggested C-Type = 4)
> > 
> >    LMP sub-object Class type (C-Type) should be assigned from 
> > the range
> >    0-127.
> > 
> >       o DATA_LINK
> >         - Link_GroupId         (suggested sub-object Type = 3)
> >         - SRLG                 (suggested sub-object Type = 4)
> >         - BER_Estimate         (suggested sub-object Type = 5)
> >         - Optical_Protection   (suggested sub-object Type = 6)
> >         - Total_Span_Length    (suggested sub-object Type = 7)
> >         - Administrative_Group (suggested sub-object Type = 8)
> > 
> > NEW:
> >    LMP [LMP] defines the following name spaces and how IANA can
> >    make assignments in those namespaces:
> > 
> >    - LMP Message Type.
> >    - LMP Object Class.
> >    - LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class.
> >    - LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the 
> Object Class.
> > 
> >    This memo introduces the following new assignments:
> > 
> >    LMP Object Class Types:
> > 
> >       o under CONFIG class name (as defined in [LMP]):
> >         - LMP-WDM_CONFIG       (suggested C-Type = 2)
> > 
> >       o uncer CHANNEL_STATUS class name (as defined in [LMP]):
> >         - LINK_GROUP           (suggested C-Type = 4)
> > 
> >    LMP Sub-object Class names:
> > 
> >       o under DATA-LINK Class name (as defined in [LMP]), Sub-object
> >         Class names should be assigned from the range 0-127:
> >         - Link_GroupId         (suggested sub-object Type = 3)
> >         - SRLG                 (suggested sub-object Type = 4)
> >         - BER_Estimate         (suggested sub-object Type = 5)
> >         - Optical_Protection   (suggested sub-object Type = 6)
> >         - Total_Span_Length    (suggested sub-object Type = 7)
> >         - Administrative_Group (suggested sub-object Type = 8)
> > 
> > Pls check and if you agree, I propose to quickly spin a new rev,
> > 
> > Same story for: <draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-03.txt>
> > 
> > Bert
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Michelle S. Cotton [mailto:cotton@icann.org]
> > > Sent: donderdag 4 december 2003 16:35
> > > To: Bert Wijnen (Bert)
> > > Cc: iesg@ietf.org
> > > Subject: Comments: <draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-02.txt>
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Bert,
> > > 
> > > In reviewing the IANA Considerations for this document, 
> > there needs to 
> > > be more clarification.
> > > 
> > > This appears to be a new registry to be set-up.
> > > There is no mention of how new registrations can be made and what 
> > > range the registry is.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Michelle
> > 
> > 
>