IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [babel] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis-11: (with COMMENT)

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> Mon, 05 August 2019 14:34 UTC

Return-Path: <jch@irif.fr>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05778120236; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 07:34:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 oBCj0F3_YiSu; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 07:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AD87120234; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 07:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id x75EYWPa002917; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 16:34:32 +0200
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33104EB6F; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 16:34:35 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id zrX_8Wcs2XMR; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 16:34:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 10BCC4EB6D; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 16:34:34 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 16:34:34 +0200
Message-ID: <87mugnllz9.wl-jch@irif.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
To: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis@ietf.org>, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>, "babel-chairs@ietf.org" <babel-chairs@ietf.org>, "babel@ietf.org" <babel@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <518548BD-80F5-4F02-9362-EC61D0D5CA7B@cisco.com>
References: <156498851376.24465.4531172446015994141.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <87v9vblt6j.wl-jch@irif.fr> <518548BD-80F5-4F02-9362-EC61D0D5CA7B@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Mon, 05 Aug 2019 16:34:32 +0200 (CEST)
X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5D483E78.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5D483E78.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/<jch@irif.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5D483E78.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/xa0WuBq4O4SCPEi9yvgC-_n3apQ>
Subject: Re: [babel] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 14:34:42 -0000

> Please state somewhere that the two options are available; perhaps by
> simply copying the text of your reply in your document.

I've added the following paragraph to Section 3.1:

   The protocol's control traffic can be carried indifferently over IPv6
   or over IPv4, and prefixes of either address family can be announced
   over either protocol.  Thus, there are at least two natural
   deployment models: using IPv6 exclusively for all control traffic, or
   running two distinct protocol instances, one for each address family.
   The exclusive use of IPv6 for all control traffic is RECOMMENDED,
   since using both protocols at the same time doubles the amount of
   traffic devoted to neighbour discovery and link quality estimation.

List: this adds a SHOULD to the draft.  Since this reflects implementation
practice, I am fairly confident that it also reflects our consensus, please
yell if I'm wrong.

-- Juliusz

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email