Chris,

On 20/05/18 01:47 , Christian Hopps wrote:
How about an option 2c

   2c: Leave the encodings the way they are, and use a common registry to 
define the type/value semantics.

having a combined registry that defines FAD Sub-TLVs types is fine with me.

thanks,
Peter

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

Reply via email to