Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-06.txt and affect on RFC3542

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 13:01:50 -0600

RFC3542 is informational.  So aren't we ok even if it is 
missing 2 codes :)  For the complete lists, the implementors
should be looking at the corresponding RFCs (ICMPv6 in
this case).  Right ?

Because RFC3542 has such CONSTANTS for ICMP, ND, MLD etc., it
will need to be updated everytime we modify one of those
RFCs.

I haven't read 3542 completely but haven't we mentioned
somewhere in there that for the complete list of type/codes
etc, one should look at the spec of that particular protocol.

Regards
Mukesh

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of ext Kristine Adamson
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 5:14 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-06.txt and affect on RFC3542

Hello, 
   Draft draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-06.txt adds 3 new ICMPv6 codes to the Destination Unreachable type.  RFC3542, Advanced Sockets Application Program Interface (API) for IPv6, provides the programming definitions for the ICMPv6 types/codes.  RFC3542 already defines one of the new codes:   
#define ICMP6_DST_UNREACH_BEYONDSCOPE 2 /* beyond scope of source address */ 

Will RFC3542 be updated to include the definitions for the additional 2 new codes: 
5 - source address failed ingress/egress policy
6 - reject route to destination                 

Thanks, 

Kristine Adamson
IBM z/OS Communications Server: TCP/IP Development
Internet e-mail:[email-masked]

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