Subject: Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-01.txt]

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 10:35:58 +0300 (EEST)

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Brian Haberman wrote:
>     This is an update based on feedback received on the list and via
> private e-mail.  Please review and comment.  I would still like to
> solicit input on WG adoption.

Not sure what was the conclusion here, but I gave it a quick a read.

My main comment is that Section 4 only specifies the behaviour of the 
EFO option (three MUSTs) on transmit.  The behaviour on receipt 
(particularly when those MUSTs are ignored) is unspecified.

I believe also the RA Option Bit 55-56 under IANA considerations 
should be 54-55 (56 be off by one bít?).

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 08:39:50 -0400

> Not sure what was the conclusion here, but I gave it a quick a read.

I am awaiting confirmation from Bob Hinden, but I see a consensus to
adopt this document and progress it to standards track.

> (particularly when those MUSTs are ignored) is unspecified.

Good catch.  I will add the following text to Section 4 to specify
receive behavior:

     - MUST ignore the option if it occurs in NDP messages other than
Router Advertisements

     - MUST only process the first occurrence of the option in a
received Router Advertisement

> 
> I believe also the RA Option Bit 55-56 under IANA considerations should
> be 54-55 (56 be off by one bít?).

Yes, they are off by one.  The experimental ones should be 54-55 and the
available for assignment ones should be 6-53.

Regards,
Brian

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 08:56:42 -0400

Brian,

> adopt this document and progress it to standards track.

I agree.  The next version of the draft (with the fixes below) should  
be published as an IPv6 working group document.  Once that is out, I  
will start a w.g. last call.

Thanks,
Bob