Subject: [Idr] Éric Vyncke's Abstain on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-registry-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 04:02:39 -0700

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-registry-04: Abstain

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-registry/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for the work done for this document even if the motivations are still
unclear to me.

Notably, why RFC 7120 'early allocation' does not work if timing to get entries
in the various IANA registries is important?

As I am trusting Alvaro's and John's positive reviews, I am only balloting
ABSTAIN [1] while fully supporting Lars' DISCUSS ballot. I also fear making a
precedent case used later for other registries.

Regards

-éric

[1] in the sense of "I oppose this document but understand that others differ
and am not going to stand in the way of the others"