Re: [6lo] AP-ND 22

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Mon, 27 April 2020 13:12 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.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 EB91C3A09FB; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 6w619h8PI08v; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x443.google.com (mail-wr1-x443.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::443]) (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 1D0763A09F6; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x443.google.com with SMTP id g13so20469733wrb.8; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=JLInvWBtGY5n/Xuf/G+pe/cqWb6Cm20boV+xIXyJIMk=; b=N6DyJTCr8z5pGiCqoHbCySFH0sXURyV/Fxpm/MpMbnWY2l4nf/Oh0PDVZ0Gu2+Yq7K DW+l0XTakESMMPK5WAuEjkKOnLs3pPu5Y79+kH4IvQ73pm0qqKJncguL0D1YrWJXMcMU yv7FV63F/ucVqVnS2Ayj/1PAG/sKRNPk/BBG5oHuVQKW8J1KSc/wX+uy3fIrsO87BQ0o gjfU4s4D7lD9JT9Qe6GropcYAqo+f5e6gsYtuqACPVwtGE3OhSTYLmI6Xw4rN/oDPyMw 9YPiHDb/TTP48Aaapz7KsIyzQO8SLvw+2FhunjO4paYV7fVTuzItoopFNpJdb0pizS/Y CbDQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JLInvWBtGY5n/Xuf/G+pe/cqWb6Cm20boV+xIXyJIMk=; b=caNQ7DYUCbbSIwgLzPp2m748+GL13ouY9XhCfpcMteymCyvUDHDcerq4K6+g9JM3/g WKCL7ePEF1IOmyeeAMNZq+pOyZQv5n/BrZ2yZLLEHXL1IvE8CDIi+xhxCq5+tK/RbYNo Uv6dN75Ep8ZZ1YMteqDdlT8WhUaWPi9EF5rN7Wop1KTKFPjY1xSgOYV9TmiBy+I2wi0x F1hVsuIchvmaeT6AS7dndC0oEr+4R6vAn6G1XhaJKGJkjUrIdEcftC/EQu7Nc2V4LuEj jSqpYwpNlR/yKT5FrzVHtqacwf2iOEmnwEKV+Aj6w+o5dCrDCzK2fBPfTeUs+ADGDN1v Rlqw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZkrBMAdeD+fB2PTci25Fhofegb4ChPiCQ6vB++Gsr4jNxyPYyh T1pNOcYGVqz/juQX/v7BuOWIx0hi6Fw7gVqpKx0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLHwY79Sl+3g627dGtauGD9DsqX6hv/xfMGB43zK7jtZv/ndcEAb5x3gYu6+9oB4x90tGkExoUPxflK/w9M2nY=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:e711:: with SMTP id c17mr28345182wrm.334.1587993123536; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <MN2PR11MB3565BD638A8BCEE57216998BD8D00@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CADnDZ8_0Bms-pGiGnAX6Cz496qhSOaCGNMggpg7fsQM5wn892w@mail.gmail.com> <20200427035234.GR27494@kduck.mit.edu> <CADnDZ89-sJ=rADyY-o8_fxbm-MB3cgmtC86GTXkmzLuf6ww66Q@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB3565871678BB9669515D194ED8AF0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB3565871678BB9669515D194ED8AF0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 15:11:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ8-Y=77G6xZNhYpBamrFVdeyX7s=_Soud1zCP2nxyOFVCw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, "6lo-chairs@ietf.org" <6lo-chairs@ietf.org>, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Mohit Sethi <mohit.m.sethi@ericsson.com>, Rene Struik <rstruik.ext@gmail.com>, "Shwetha Bhandari (shwethab)" <shwethab@cisco.com>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>, Erik Kline <ek@loon.com>, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000008c36605a44576f4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/gH-tiVtEMLXxARNdr-htL7GHztk>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:15:55 -0700
Subject: Re: [6lo] AP-ND 22
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 13:12:07 -0000

Hello Pascal,

usually when I read RFCs I like to see the updates and to remind the
readers/users of standards relationships,
I would not like to always have to go to IANA registrations to see their
updates, I want to see IETF updates of their docs.


On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 2:32 PM Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hello Abdussalam:
>
>
>
> I added the suggested IANA
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd-22#section-8.4 .
>
> I trust the IESG on the meaning of updating.
>

We all do trust them but just we may give reminders,

>
>
> Stay safe,
>

you too,

best regards

AB



>
>
> Pascal
>
>
>
> *From:* 6lo <6lo-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Abdussalam Baryun
> *Sent:* lundi 27 avril 2020 14:00
> *To:* Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
> *Cc:* 6lo-chairs@ietf.org; Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert=
> 40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>gt;; Mohit Sethi <mohit.m.sethi@ericsson.com>om>;
> Rene Struik <rstruik.ext@gmail.com>om>; Shwetha Bhandari (shwethab) <
> shwethab@cisco.com>gt;; 6lo@ietf.org; Erik Kline <ek@loon.com>om>; Jim Schaad <
> ietf@augustcellars.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [6lo] AP-ND 22
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 5:52 AM Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 09:10:33AM +0200, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
> >   The draft should indicated on top first page that it updates RFC6775,
> > 7400, and 8505, it only shows updating RFC8505.
>
> The 6775 case was discussed extensively during IESG Evaluation.
> Note that 8505 itself Updates 6775, and the changes in this document affect
> only what 8505 does (IIRC).  I'm not sure why you want this document to
> update 7400 -- it seems to just be allocating some bits from the "6LoWPAN
> capability Bits" registry established by 7400.
>
>
>
> IMO it updates section 3.4 in RFC7400, it is not only adding bits, it is
> adding the way of using 6CIO, we would not add bits only to add tasks in
> protocols,
>
>
>
> (Well, it would be if the
> IANA considerations were updated to state that, at least.)  Allocating bits
> from a registry is usually not seen to need an Updates relationship.
>
>
>
> yes IMO it should include also the IANA considerations
>
>
>
> best regards
>
>
>
> AB
>
>
>
>
> -Ben
>
>