IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6lo] Draft applicability for 6775bis

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Thu, 20 April 2017 09:55 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D98B212EC6C for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 02:55:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SICDIQyJoEi9 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 02:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x22c.google.com (mail-ua0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39A0B12EC69 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 02:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id a1so44804447uaf.3 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 02:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=s1po85X08dr4aXj0dnsSblioz/zzPwqLsMOXBrpsSkk=; b=KBSVvB2eFpqNkcWzy+zM96i5Kpq6xpi70Dp/Rj23HxbGQ6Jmc7/qy95vnlX667BpKe /am5e+tn+Is+uYKqj9AAl/tvwP19/S5+tBl8emxTXGmYB4H144BOZ0zO99viYtdrr2MT Fw/V9YKciOtcRRumbsQe56wBkX/D0gEZRQXMYvZLDfAA8biulG9eRba5g2bZQkFrL3Tf LG5j7E4cF+OhgSfUZ3i1HWQHZeq1oumbIQq2DKQ1LxEoK2LYDlkykjXE3f7bZl3pgRzx 8iewDy+N4l6LlXdRUvdePjd6QCO8Z0kGbteWNBXo3GY8rvbDsfBxIqOA/yGwLgqZqDAS ZIqw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=s1po85X08dr4aXj0dnsSblioz/zzPwqLsMOXBrpsSkk=; b=sD/o6il+28Vde9JoIe4thxMfovxZ9Wm3xMnC6XkozQ65hqa/xBzFXNIO6giAlESMNO BACkkUXQbLAYkcyUiFyYdAtR8vmXM5He4ru5ROiiZKEOWmNAvMfJAt9QLiKPm2jWPEvw bptKADneXGfe0AUPFk5yvTjiQ70iuRh7z3ZnTC+0ajir8tYc3bKbwEwNZJIkXj4luOGt 0ra+Kla0+oFXfE3JpM7inXEWEIhBGttW0VFRqd/B+yucwfLY/kzam0GZZM945ibixndE /z33sKmwN2PxHHclvWGQGunLgjP/mdGzc1/Dkkr2JnQWypW2kKodcm8hdNhhs5OLkuWH 2Q4w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/5wj729mI0rIYJHRMl+8nBIzYdAHxCXQdw4OaJL4987Prnb/23o 5ujQpaSqdyq12VUzHaXZO7FjB8GNLuT5
X-Received: by 10.176.82.100 with SMTP id j33mr3331496uaa.57.1492682104101; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 02:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.31.110.200 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 02:54:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <a37ba07e66b84179b65588d8c1f7380e@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <0d33195c-d828-1d5b-6a49-ca23d9d4a793@sonic.net> <CY1PR03MB22654E9D09DC4384A74D9188A3350@CY1PR03MB2265.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CFC7EFC7-BD75-43DC-A61C-FF7ABD7337A3@ericsson.com> <e8161f19-4be2-1f7b-99e3-785a515accbd@innovationslab.net> <a37ba07e66b84179b65588d8c1f7380e@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 18:54:43 +0900
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr2KxYk+3BjUg9CjWtzU0P97bJT=P39iMHfA_zV_4awKNQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Cc: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@sonic.net>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c191232942a4b054d962288"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/UltDJAgsYcp3mx6drAfQ4tARdNw>
Subject: Re: [6lo] Draft applicability for 6775bis
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for the 6lo WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6lo/>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 09:55:16 -0000

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:15 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:

> I also removed the administrative rejection, the return codes are now as
> follows:
> [...]
>    |   8   | Invalid Registered Address: The address being registered  |
>    |       | is not usable on this link, e.g. it is not topologically  |
>    |       | correct                                                   |
>

As worded, it's not clear to me how this option is substantially different
from the administrative rejection option. Could it be scoped more tightly,
e.g., renamed to "Address topologically incorrect"?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email