RE: Last Call: Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS vto Proposed Standard

["IANA" <iana@iana.org>]

IESG:

The IANA has reviewed the following Internet-Drafts 
which are in Last Call and has the following comments 
with regards to the publication of these documents:

 o Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS
     <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-05.txt>

We understand there to be no IANA Actions for this document


 o OSPF Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS
     <draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-09.txt>

The IANA Considerations section says the following:

   This memo introduces 4 new sub-TLVs of the TE Link TLV in the TE
   Opaque LSA for OSPF v2; [OSPF-TE] says that the sub-TLVs of the TE
   Link TLV in the range 10-32767 must be assigned by Expert Review, and
   must be registered with IANA.

   This memo has four suggested values for the four sub-TLVs of the TE
   Link TLV; it is strongly recommended that the suggested values be
   granted, as there are interoperable implementations using these
   values.

This is a bit confusing.  Which registry are these 4 new sub-TLVs going
into?  <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ospf-opaque-types> ? 
Is the TE Link TLV defined in [OSPF-TE]?

[OSPF-TE] Katz, D., Yeung, D. and Kompella, K., "Traffic Engineering
       Extensions to OSPF", (work in progress)

If so, shouldn't the defining document go first?

There are lots of other "values" listed in the document.  There is only 
1 "TBD".  In the IANA Considerations section it talks about 4 assignments.

The directions to the IANA need to be more clear.

Please respond to the IANA about our concerns with regards to this
document.  Failing to do so may cause delay of the approval and
publication of your document.

Thank you.

Michelle S. Cotton
(on behalf of the IANA)