RE: Last Call: IP Header Compression over PPP to Proposed Standard

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

Great!  We are on the same page here.

We'll just wait for approval then.  :)

Michelle
IANA



-----Original Message-----
From: casner@packetdesign.com [mailto:casner@packetdesign.com]On Behalf
Of Stephen Casner
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 3:36 PM
To: IANA
Cc: iesg@ietf.org; cabo@tzi.org; Tmima Koren; Karl Fox
Subject: RE: Last Call: IP Header Compression over PPP to Proposed
Standard


On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, IANA wrote:

> IESG:
>
> The IANA has reviewed the following Internet-Draft which is in Last
> Call: <draft-koren-pppext-rfc2509bis-03.txt>, and has the following
> comments with regards to the publication of this document:
>
> The IANA Considerations section mentions 3 registries that
> do may not exist. After looking in the PPP-Numbers registry I
> see the following:
>
> See: <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ppp-numbers>
>
> IP-Compression-Protocol Types
> IPv6-Compression-Protocol Types
> IP Header Compression Configuration Option Suboption Types
>
> Are these the same as what you are referring to in this
> document?

Yes, those are the three registries that were created in March, 2002
when I sent a preview of this IANA Considerations section to you as
part of a discussion of the related IANA Considerations in RFC-to-be
<draft-ietf-rohc-over-ppp-04.txt> at that time.

> Do we understand that the 2 sub-option types are to be
> put in the IP Header Compression Configuration Option Suboption Types
> registry?

Yes.  In that message from 4-Mar-2002 we left a fourth step for the
future (the comment prefixed with "***" is yours):

    4.  As part of publishing draft-koren-pppext-rfc2509bis-00.txt as an
	RFC, which we expect to be approved real soon now, do the
	following:

	- Add the new values 2 and 3 to the IP Header Compression
	  Configuration Option Suboption Types registry proposed in step 1
	  above.

    ***Will wait for actual approval and then add values.

So, we have now finally reached that time.  Below my signature is the
text I suggest for the two new sub-option types 2 and 3, where
"RFC2509bis" is to be replaced by the new RFC number.  Thanks.

                                                        -- Steve


IP Header Compression Configuration Option Suboption Types per [RFC2509]

Value       Description                             Reference
------      ----------------------------------      ---------
     1      RTP Header Compression           [RFC2508,RFC2509]
     2      Enhanced RTP-Compression              [RFC2509bis]
     3      TCP or non-TCP Compression Disable    [RFC2509bis]