Subject: draft-ietf-ipv6-ra-flags-option edits

From: Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 10:57:59 -0400

All,
      The IESG reviewed the RA flags option draft and provided several 
comments.  In order to address those comments, I proposed the following 
OLD/NEW edits to the document.  I will submit a revised version of the 
document to the ID editor soon.  If you have issues with the proposed 
changes, please let me know quickly.

OLD:
       Length = 1; The length MUST be checked when processing the option
       in order to allow for future expansion of this option if the need
       arises.

NEW:
       Length - The length MUST be checked when processing the option
       in order to allow for future expansion of this option.  An
       implementation of this specification MUST set the Length to 1,
       MUST ignore any unrecognized data, and MUST be able to recognize
       the specified length in order to skip over unrecognized bits.

OLD:
    During the construction/transmission, this option:

    o  MUST only occur in Router Advertisement messages

    o  MUST be the first option immediately following the Router
       Advertisement message header

    o  MUST only occur once in the Router Advertisement message.

NEW:
    During the construction/transmission, this option:

    o  MUST only occur in Router Advertisement messages

    o  MUST occur prior to any additional options associated with any
       flags set in this option

    o  MUST only occur once in the Router Advertisement message

    o  MUST NOT be added to a Router Advertisement message if no flags
       in the option are set

    o  MUST have all unused flags set to zero.

OLD:
    Upon reception, a receiver processing NDP messages containing this
    option:

    o  MUST ignore the option if it occurs in a message other than a
       Router Advertisement

    o  MUST ignore the option if it is not the first option in the Router
       Advertisement

    o  MUST ignore all instances of the option except the first one
       encountered in the Router Advertisement message

NEW:
    Upon reception, a receiver processing NDP messages containing this
    option:

    o  MUST ignore the option if it occurs in a message other than a
       Router Advertisement

    o  MUST ignore all instances of the option except the first one
       encountered in the Router Advertisement message

    o  MUST ignore the option if the Length is less than 1

    o  MUST ignore any unknown flag bits.

OLD:
    The bit fields within the option are numbered from left to right from
    8 to 55 and follow the numbering of the flag bits in the RA option
    described in Figure 1.  Flag bits 0 to 7 are found in the Router
    Advertisement message header defined in [1]

NEW:
    The bit fields within the option are numbered from left to right from
    8 to 55 (starting at bit offset 16 in the option) and follow the
    numbering of the flag bits in the RA option described in Figure 1.
    Flag bits 0 to 7 are found in the Router Advertisement message header
    defined in [1]

OLD:
    The assignment of new RA flags in the RA option header and for the
    bits defined in the RA extension option defined in this document
    require standards action or IESG approval.

NEW:
    The assignment of new RA flags in the RA option header and for the
    bits defined in the RA extension option defined in this document
    require standards action or IESG approval [RFC2434].

Regards,
Brian

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

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:23:28 +0300

I did not see any complaints, so given that Brian's new
version is in the directories I will proceed with the
approval.

Thanks,

Jari

Brian Haberman kirjoitti:
> comments.  In order to address those comments, I proposed the
> following OLD/NEW edits to the document.  I will submit a revised
> version of the document to the ID editor soon.  If you have issues
> with the proposed changes, please let me know quickly.
>
>
>
> OLD: