Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-update-05.txt> (Updated Specification of the IPv4 ID Field) to Proposed Standard

From: "C. M. Heard" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:08:57 -0700 (PDT)

On Thu, 31 May 2012, The IESG wrote:

> The IESG has received a request from the Internet Area Working Group WG
> (intarea) to consider the following document:
> - 'Updated Specification of the IPv4 ID Field'
>   <draft-ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-update-05.txt> as 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
> [email-masked] mailing lists by 2012-06-14. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

I commented on the previous version of this draft during WG last 
call (as a WG non-member) and supported its publication then.  I 
have looked over the changes in the present version and continue to 
support its publication.  I believe that it addresses an operational 
deficiency in current IPv4 specifications and largely codifies 
existing pactice.

My one reservation is that I do not think it is strictly necessary 
to ban re-use of the IPv4 ID value in retransmitted non-atomic IPv4 
datagrams.  On the other hand, the evidence available to me suggests 
that existing implementations overwhelmingly comply with this ban 
anyway, so it does not seem to do any harm.

Regards,

C. M. Heard