Hi Authors, Thanks for working on this document to capture the current state of PCAP Link Types and request for the creation of an IANA registry, such that, from now on, these values can be maintained by IANA.
Thanks also to Joel M. Halpern for the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review and Carlos Bernardos for INTDIR review. There are but a few nits/comments that would be good to discuss before sending this document forward. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 2.2, paragraph 8 > * Values from 0 to 32767 are allocated following a First-Come First- > Served policy (Section 4.4 of [RFC8126]). Note that this category > includes the historical allocations which have an uneven level of > definition. What happens if a value in this range has been in use historically? Section 2.2.2, paragraph 0 > When processing a request for a Specification Required allocation the > Designated Experts are expected to be able to find the relevant > specification at a clearly stable URL. It is noted that many > enterprise web sites do not maintain URLs over a long period of time, > and a document in a "wp-uploaded" section is highly likely to > disappear. In addition, specifications that require a reader to > click through any kind of marketing or legal agreement are not > considered public. What is "wp-uploaded section"? Section 2.2.2, paragraph 2 > LinkTypes may be allocated for specifications not publicly available > may be made within the FCFS range. This includes specifications that > might be classified. The minimal requirement is to provide a contact > person for that link type. What does it mean for a specification to be classified? Classified by whom? Contacts move. Why is it enough to have person's contact information to assign a value, particularly if specifications behind a paywall are discouraged? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NIT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you did with these suggestions. Section 2.2, paragraph 9 > The initial contents of the table are based upon the Link type list > maintained by libpcap, and published on [TCPDUMP]. s/Link type/LinkType/ "Table of Contents", paragraph 1 > . 37 1. Introduction In the late 1980's, Van Jacobson, Steve McCanne, and ot > ^^^^^^ Apostrophes aren't needed for decades. Section 2.2, paragraph 11 > are associated with specific operation system captures, and are operating s > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The word "operation" doesn't fit in this context. Thanks Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanand...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
