RE: Where to define IANAtunnelType TC

["David B Harrington" <ietfdbh@comcast.net>]

Hi,

OK, I'll weigh in on this.

IANA has a charter to coordinate the assignment of numbers for
Internet usage. It is appropriate for IANA to coordinate internet
developers by making publicly accessible for lookup the assignment of
"ethernetCsmacd(6)"; The assignment of the number (6) is unlikely to
be debated in the future.

The IPv6 working group is responsible for the specification and
standardization of the Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6). The tunnel
mib is in-scope for that effort, and there is a significant amount of
text in the TC description which is the result of debate/consensus of
the WG. The text could result in debate in the future, and the WG may
decide it needs to be updated. If such debate does ensue, then the WG
should moderate the debate and coordinate any changes to the
specification. Therefore, it should remain in a document under the
control of the WG. 

I believe the TC specification is out-of-scope for IANA, and in-scope
for the WG.
  
dbh

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 1:44 PM
To: C. M. Heard; Mreview (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Where to define IANAtunnelType TC

> On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> > 1. I agree with Bert that the TC does not belong to
IANAifType-MIB. 
> > Actually the change in the model seems to be departing from 
> > mandating the modeling of a tunnel as an interface.
> 
> I support putting the TC into the IANAifType-MIB.
> 
> As previously discussed, the reason for putting the IANAtunnelType
TC 
> into the IANAifType-MIB is to make it clear that new tunnel types 
> should NOT get new ifType values but rather should be allocated new 
> tunnel type values instead.  If both TCs are in the same MIB module 
> then it's relatively easy to get that message across.  If they are
in 
> separate places then that message is likely to get lost.  As you
know, 
> we've had trouble with people allocating new ifType values for 
> Ethernet interfaces despite the stated policy against that in the
last 
> several iterations of the EthernetLike-MIB.
> 
The best way to achieve proper allocation of ifTypes is to put CLEAR
INSTRUCTIONs for IANA into the DESCRIPTION claise of the IfType TC.
And same for tunnerType.

And as I think I have said before, if there are a few more volunteers
for reviewing requests for assignments, by all means let me know.

Bert
> More later if I have time.
> 
> Mike
> 
>