&= nbsp; The document satisfied ID nits. No further formal reviews are

required.

&nbs= p; (1.h) Has the document split its references into normative a= nd

informative? Are= there normative references to documents that

= are not ready for advancement or are otherwise i= n an unclear

state?= If such normative references exist, what is the

&nbs= p; strategy for their completion? Are there norm= ative references

th= at are downward references, as described in [RFC3967]? If

&= nbsp; so, list these downward references t= o support the Area

= Director in the Last Call procedure for them [RFC3967].

Yes, the references are split appropr= iately. There is one reference=0B

= ; to the ANCP framework, that will need to be updated as both = documents

should be published together.=

= (1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA

consideration section exists a= nd is consistent with the body

&= nbsp; of the document? If the document specifies protocol

extensions, are reservations r= equested in appropriate IANA

&nb= sp; registries? Are the IANA registries clearly identified? If <= /div>

the document creates a ne= w registry, does it define the

&= nbsp; proposed initial contents of the registry and an allocation&nbs= p;

procedure for future r= egistrations? Does it suggest a

= reasonable name for the new registry? See [RFC5226]. If the&nb= sp;

document describes an= Expert Review process has Shepherd

&nb= sp; conferred with the Responsible Area Director so that the I= ESG

can appoint the= needed Expert during the IESG Evaluation?

&= nbsp; The IANA considerations section exists and makes a= ppropriate

requests.

(1.j) Has the Document Shepherd ve= rified that sections of the

&nbs= p; document that are written in a formal language, such as XML <= /div>

code, BNF rules, MIB defi= nitions, etc., validate correctly in

&n= bsp; an automated checker?

&nbs= p; There are no sections that use a formal language.

(1.k) The IESG appr= oval announcement includes a Document

&= nbsp; Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document&nb= sp;

Announcement Write-Up= ? Recent examples can be found in the

= "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval&nb= sp;

announcement contains= the following sections:

Technical Summary

This document describes the Access Nod= e Control Protocol (ANCP).

ANCP operates between a N= etwork Access Server (NAS) and an Access

Node (e.g.,= a Digital Subscriber Line Access Multiplexer (DSLAM)) in

&= nbsp; a multi-service reference architecture in order to perform QoS-

related, service-related and subscriber-related operation= s. Use

cases for ANCP are documented in RFC 58= 51. As well as describing the

base ANCP protoc= ol, this document specifies capabilities for Digital

= Subscriber Line (DSL) topology discovery, line configuration, and

remote line connectivity testing. The design of ANCP a= llows for

protocol extensions in other documents if = they are needed to support

other use cases and other= access technologies.

ANCP is based o= n GSMPv3 (RFC 3292), but with many modifications and

= extensions, to the point that the two protocols are not

&n= bsp; interoperable.

This document is = a product of the ANCP working group.

= This document is Standards Track.

Working Group Su= mmary

The origin of the working group can be trace= d back to the WT-147 "Layer 2 Control Protocol"

document fr= om the Broadband Forum. The ANCP protocol developed in the ANCP working gro= up

as a result of that document is typically used in the ac= cess and aggregation portions of a broadband

access network= , and also in inter-provider

environments. This draft specifies t= he base protocol for ANCP, which is n itself derived from GSMP.

<= br>

Document Quality

The document specif= ies the base protocol for ANCP which has a number of implementations.

Personnel

Who is the Document She= pherd for this document?

Matthew Bocci (matt= hew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com)

Who is the Responsib= le Area Director?

Ralph Droms=20 --_000_C96F2A358971matthewboccialcatellucentcom_-- From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Wed Feb 9 06:15:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E59163A69DA; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07DHghKKAfLy; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 308A33A69C0; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.12 Message-ID: <20110209141502.22459.31248.idtracker@localhost> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 06:15:02 -0800 Cc: ancp@ietf.org Subject: [ANCP] I-D Action:draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-04.txt X-BeenThere: ancp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 14:15:03 -0000 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Access Node Control Protocol Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multicast Control Extensions for ANCP Author(s) : F. Le Faucheur, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-04.txt Pages : 95 Date : 2011-02-09 This document specifies the extensions to the Access Node Control Protocol required for support of the multicast use cases defined in the Access Node Control Protocol framework document and one additional use case described in this document. These use cases are organized into the following ANCP capabilities: o NAS-initiated multicast replication; o conditional access with white and black lists; o conditional access with grey lists; o bandwidth delegation; o committed bandwidth reporting. These capabilities may be combined according to the rules given in this specification. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2011-02-09061324.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From tom111.taylor@bell.net Wed Feb 9 06:15:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C916E3A69E9 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:16 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.796 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nE9O1n5LoQ2O for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from blu0-omc2-s38.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc2-s38.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.111.113]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DB013A69ED for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLU0-SMTP83 ([65.55.111.71]) by blu0-omc2-s38.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:24 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [174.94.11.167] X-Originating-Email: [tom111.taylor@bell.net] Message-ID: Received: from [192.168.2.17] ([174.94.11.167]) by BLU0-SMTP83.blu0.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:15:24 -0800 Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 09:15:37 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "ancp@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Feb 2011 14:15:24.0935 (UTC) FILETIME=[CB5C9170:01CBC863] Subject: [ANCP] draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-04 X-BeenThere: ancp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 14:15:16 -0000 I have just submitted a keep-alive update. The document needs a thorough review in the light of the updates to the base protocol document. I hope to get at that soon. Tom Taylor From matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com Mon Feb 21 07:57:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3904A3A6FBF for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 07:57:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -104.641 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.641 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.807, BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id inWtegMm7T7j for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 07:57:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.57]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF493A6EF0 for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 07:57:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id p1LFve7K021223 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:57:40 +0100 Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSA3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.36]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.63]) with mapi; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:57:40 +0100 From: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" To: "ancp@ietf.org" Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:57:37 +0100 Thread-Topic: Prague meeting slots Thread-Index: AcvR4BD7vMRXC2KCS+CPiClsD7AG8w== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C9883BF19C16matthewboccialcatellucentcom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 155.132.188.80 Subject: [ANCP] Prague meeting slots X-BeenThere: ancp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:57:02 -0000 --_000_C9883BF19C16matthewboccialcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable All, Please can you let us know if you would like a slot in the ANCP meeting in = Prague. If so, please send a summary of what you would like to talk about. Regards Matthew and Woj --_000_C9883BF19C16matthewboccialcatellucentcom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

All,

Please can you let us know if you would like a slot in the ANCP meeti= ng in Prague. If so, please send a summary of what you would like to talk a= bout.

Regards

Matthew and= Woj

--_000_C9883BF19C16matthewboccialcatellucentcom_-- From tom111.taylor@bell.net Tue Feb 22 05:45:49 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B2A83A68E0 for ; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:45:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.796 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yKe4CW7v9hq9 for ; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:45:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from blu0-omc2-s37.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc2-s37.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.111.112]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64DF53A68D6 for ; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:45:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from BLU0-SMTP59 ([65.55.111.73]) by blu0-omc2-s37.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:46:32 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [174.94.11.167] X-Originating-Email: [tom111.taylor@bell.net] Message-ID: Received: from [192.168.2.17] ([174.94.11.167]) by BLU0-SMTP59.blu0.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:46:32 -0800 Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:46:33 -0500 From: Tom Taylor User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Feb 2011 13:46:32.0498 (UTC) FILETIME=[EA1E6920:01CBD296] Cc: "ancp@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [ANCP] Prague meeting slots X-BeenThere: ancp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:45:49 -0000 I'm hoping I have the multicast document ready for WGLC, so perhaps 10-15 minutes for changes as a result of the base document update. On 21/02/2011 10:57 AM, Bocci, Matthew (Matthew) wrote: > All, > > Please can you let us know if you would like a slot in the ANCP meeting in Prague. If so, please send a summary of what you would like to talk about. > > Regards > > Matthew and Woj > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ANCP mailing list > ANCP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp From iesg-secretary@ietf.org Wed Feb 23 08:57:25 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D36F83A6927; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:57:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.576 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.576 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R-zs4vX1jTqR; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:57:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B15F3A67A1; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:57:25 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 3.12 Message-ID: <20110223165725.17207.94768.idtracker@localhost> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:57:25 -0800 Cc: ancp@ietf.org Subject: [ANCP] Last Call: (Protocol for Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband Networks) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: ancp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:57:25 -0000 The IESG has received a request from the Access Node Control Protocol WG (ancp) to consider the following document: - 'Protocol for Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband Networks' as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-03-09. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ancp-protocol/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ancp-protocol/ The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: /ipr/1124/ From evnikita2@gmail.com Wed Feb 23 10:19:11 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ancp@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8EC63A676A; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:19:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.356 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.356 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.243, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VdRXjqvmOLsr; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:19:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F4673A6935; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:19:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by bwz13 with SMTP id 13so443251bwz.31 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:19:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oKhnS1RKRkOhc9AbKkcb9HSV5GlAGPQhhreK7yvipeM=; b=HkLMaygx4+hrrkxiCLxt8HJMgWrMwkzR3BBEEtib/lWwTvH7QkzR3D3JAGG6peynkA vJX31kx/hYu3u2a33IbMdimsfue01eADV0fcN9+6P/2z3iq2isyG3NcXsKtVR0njMq/h TKtSG7Jq9nQUGV0JqipFiFttCnrQehQmxCe/k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=sV1q6Eh+6pEzek221qvfa2k8999iVwucgqdw3cAcMk5kftfY8+FpqHIR3Jc/W7PMZb +Fq3EcFPehfXA9UZFeRoZfe/BM9xbszJI/Inao2W5paKkfuGq3FHVl0yEyqR0o8sOpOJ 7f36tR8O0RcOfqP7g8nB+qhwmKWqzXFDL8y8c= Received: by 10.204.136.15 with SMTP id p15mr2969359bkt.77.1298485191430; Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:19:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([195.191.104.134]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j11sm5514522bka.0.2011.02.23.10.19.49 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:19:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4D654FE3.8080001@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 20:20:19 +0200 From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ru; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ietf@ietf.org References: <20110223165725.17207.94768.idtracker@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20110223165725.17207.94768.idtracker@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 10:45:01 -0800 Cc: ancp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ANCP] Last Call: (Protocol for Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband Networks) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: ancp@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Access Node Control Protocol working group mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 18:19:12 -0000 Hello, Let me comment the IANA consideration section of this document. > IANA is requested to implement the following modification to the > General Switch Management Protocol version 3 (GSMPv3) Result Type > Name Space registry: > > +--------------+-----------------------+-----------+ > | Result Value | Result Type Name | Reference | > +--------------+-----------------------+-----------+ > | 0 | Ignore (was Reserved) | RFCXXXX | > +--------------+-----------------------+-----------+ In the registry you are modifying the value 0 is now Reserved. RFC 5226 says: > Reserved: Not to be assigned. Reserved values are held for > special uses, such as to extend the namespace when it become > exhausted. Reserved values are not available for general > assignment. Therefore it is not permitted to register reserved values. Moreover, this document says that you shouldn't have mentioned exact values you want to register - see Section 5.1 of RFC 5226 (the same applies to another registry modifications, as one might notice). Next, > IANA is requested to create a new ANCP Port Management Function Name > registry, with the following initial entries. Additions to this > registry will be by IETF Consensus. You should have here the reference to RFC 5226, shouldn't you? (This also applies to other registry descriptions) > Values may range from 0 to 255. > > [ . . . ] What is more, > IANA is requested to create a new ANCP Version registry, with > additions by IETF consensus. The initial entries are as follows: > > +---------+-------------+--------------+-----------+ > | Version | Sub-Version | Name | Reference | > +---------+-------------+--------------+-----------+ > | 3 | 1 | Pre-standard | | > | 3 | 2 | ANCPv1 | RFCXXXX | > +---------+-------------+--------------+-----------+ This description is obviously missing the definition of values' format, or at least key values. Moreover, > IANA is requested to create a new ANCP Command Code registry, with > additions by IETF Consensus. The initial entry is as follows: > > +--------------------+-----------------------------+-----------+ > | Command Code Value | Command Code Directive Name | Reference | > +--------------------+-----------------------------+-----------+ > | 0 | Reserved | RFCXXXX | > +--------------------+-----------------------------+-----------+ The same as above applies. Moreover, does this registry consists of only one values, that is reserved and therefore cannot be assigned, per RFC 5226? This is at least impossible. Finally, > IANA is requested to create a new ANCP TLV Type registry, with > additions by IETF Consensus. Values may range from 0x0000 to 0xFFFF. > New assignments should be in the range of values from 0x0100 upwards. > The initial entries are as follows: Here you should have mentioned that values are hexadecimal, for clarity. Thank you for considering my comments in advance. All the best, Mykyta Yevstifeyev 23.02.2011 18:57, The IESG wrote: > The IESG has received a request from the Access Node Control Protocol WG > (ancp) to consider the following document: > - 'Protocol for Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband Networks' > as a Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-03-09. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > The file can be obtained via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ancp-protocol/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ancp-protocol/ > > > > The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D: > > /ipr/1124/ > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce >