RE: IANA assignments

["Naidu, Venkata" <Venkata.Naidu@Marconi.com>]

Dimitri,

-> to what *change* do you refer here, when you say
-> 
-> " If not, at least, isn't it a good idea to let the WG know
-> the rational reason behind changing the proposed value in the
-> draft ?"
-> 
-> The SENDER_TSPEC/FLOWSPEC values were always mentioned as TBA
-> and value 3 has never been reserved -

  I am referring to old expired long lived RSVP-TE drafts which
  used C-Type 3 and we all implemented and shipped with 3.
  When we decide to remove C-Type, isn't it good to reserve
  at the change/deprecating time ?
  (draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel-07.txt was published in Aug 2000 
  and draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-lsp-tunnel-08.txt was published in 
  Feb 2001)

  All I am saying is, IANA can have a guideline for long lived
  drafts, such as:
  
     If there is a shipped implementation with an old deprecated
     value, that value MUST be reserved to prevent future misuse.
     It MUST be noted in the subsequent drafts and final RFC.

Venkata.