Guy Harris <ghar...@sonic.net> wrote:
> The descriptions of many link-layer types are either 1) too long or 2)
> insufficient to fully describe the link-layer type or 3) both(!).
> The descriptions should be short, and the entry should have, as
> a reference, a web page that gives a complete description. Some
> entries already have that.I am much less concerned about getting the exact information in than you are, and more concerned that we get over this hump. I accept that not every entry will be fully described; and that's okay. As for the the width and contents. My understanding (and experience) is that when we give IANA the initial contents, they *take* it, initialize the registry, and then, the RPC actually removes the table from the document. The IANA registry itself is authoritative, not the document, so DRY. I also asked IANA is they would prefer to just receive this content as XML. They said they didn't care; we could do that if we wanted, but none of the tooling makes that easier. Joel: I have added a Security Considerations. Sorry for that obvious lack. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
