Subject: draft-ietf-ipv6-router-selection-02.txt issues list

From: "Dave Thaler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:50:37 -0800

I've gone through the threads that Rich Draves sent me to extract 
the issues  raised with draft-ietf-ipv6-router-selection-02.txt.

There were a number of relatively minor editorial suggestions to 
which Rich had responded with an okay.  These I am already 
incorporating into the document.

Besides those, there were 10 issues raised which are now at 
http://www.icir.org/dthaler/RouterSelectionIssues.htm

I should have a proposed update available prior to IETF.

-Dave

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

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:27:26 +0200 (EET)

Hi,

Just hoping to avoid the similar mess as we're having with MIPv6 and 
MLDv2, would it be possible to pre-assign a Neighbor Discovery Option 
code for more specific routes extension in:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters

.. this shouldn't cause a problem, as there are no IANA considerations 
for applying these in RFC2461, and I guess they're allocated in a 
basically FCFS basis.

Various ímplementations are using various values, at least some of 
them "9" -- which is already being used for something else.

Would it make thse to try to pre-assign a value at this point so folks 
could start building interoperable implementations already? :-)

(Assuming that the spec is going to be finished soon.. :-)

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

---

From: Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:04:06 -0500

Pekka,
      There are two ways we could do this.  One would be for the
doc authors to request a value from IANA.  The other would be to
push draft-narten-iana-experimental-allocations-05.txt through
the process and utilize it for early testing/experimentation.

Regards,
Brian

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:13:59 +0200 (EET)

> the process and utilize it for early testing/experimentation.

I'd recommend the former; or failing that, WG chairs or the 
shepherding AD could do it, or solicit 'IESG Approval' for the number 
allocation.

At this point, IMHO it's too late for the experimental allocations, 
but they will prove to be useful in the future.