Document: draft-ietf-idr-rfc3392bis-04.txt Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review Date: 6 January 2009 IESG Telechat date: 8 January 2009 Summary: Ready for Draft Standard. The points noted in the LC review of -02 have been addressed. Meta-issue: Lack of IANA registry for parameter types in BGP OPEN messages: This point was raised in the LC review and was agreed to be a matter for the ADs to resolve - Amanda Baber of IANA may also be interested: [Original note: .. after diligent searching both in the RFCs and on the IANA web site, I believe that neither the original BGP RFCs 1771/4671, RFC 3392 nor this draft define a registry for the parameter types in OPEN messages. Discussion with John Scudder subsequently: >> IANA Considerations: There does not appear to be a registry for OPEN >> message (optional) parameter types! > > Appendix A of RFC 4271 notes that "Optional Parameter Type 1 > (Authentication Information) has been deprecated." There was never a type 0. OK. Missed that. > > Regarding the lack of registry, that's a good observation but I don't > think it's within the scope of rfc3392bis to remedy, it seems like an RFC 4271 issue. Perhaps the IDR chairs and/or ADs can address this? (As a practical matter I'd be surprised if there were ever another OPEN optional parameter defined, but I guess it might be worth fixing anyway.) I am inclined to agree with your final point here.. and for that reason I wouldn't worry too much if the registry was declared in this document (this would not be the first time an oversight had been cleared up in this sort of way) but as you say, this is a matter for the Chairs/ADs. ]