Re: [Cbor] 🔔 WGLC with request for reviews on cbor-network-addresses-05

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 17 July 2021 03:24 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE5CF3A0A64 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 20:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 bNQFGCFH1VmU for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 20:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52d.google.com (mail-pg1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52d]) (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 A92A03A0A63 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 20:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id s18so11888653pgg.8 for <cbor@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 20:24:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ud100s1TH681LK/nlI8Y3QJvbBzUqVprVZvFgj5kWc8=; b=Chz6r8hfSZi0T+y85wb0OqsVP0k1q4ILICfFrQcQdwg+C0HAlds8WvUNWRgfVWSp3t /eBJ11KlCmXPLw0DLZU0IeoOthrRTrQ1A2wx7fzjbyUi/ELQj1bI3EYxLrdyRYxcUcQP L31Tgaix8/C2J/K2QHbKtHmz3KEjGGaRbKjhqTkFi6M/Tv7Jm+YkyDlVJesZceiNKSIb AbFbQC4RECoqiyYEdOvz1KY6O/ZiQE+fCB+MmaCVHub+MSRAsEnwS/IcUiUdMYosZvxQ lyrpawYfHJntFd84JGqFx90y/Ez1Zjm4bb2xPq+3Y4ScZS9p5X/ISTMFau11G+T82UB+ wUHg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ud100s1TH681LK/nlI8Y3QJvbBzUqVprVZvFgj5kWc8=; b=in4y0IICgNRmLOxOI14b7XMgrFVn2RYO5C7kv04ko/R4nWio9rQpiyhm8/guEwGBq8 /WUszgv6ieJ2NP0tf/8/7ClhdEEcvqoOzxfOeF3kSRGR7Ewy1C6NEZwXJoXLMRAkl5er cRv0AKGp2MaTv/0chUTq9dbG6xyubDck+p62HY5UmJSzGu4ohGGDZX/xFo9Q0yhTesUR bjgScwK8X2CcwNUTPW4xO7l8SORnLmnEtJlV6TIUWfGM2HQEoaR0MY1ZFF4FcGzGcQZX RkYT2uOl3oTiGoZU1QQoKBYxPt/aqUpmbpro1SSte4R9Q2VQ1nOYGsCqqOZt6BDhfhEO XsPw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531F3c695Ufd6BtMr2JiIp2yay8xfGgirAogfXGqAIa5LTcU+Kv9 dU2tvGvC1z4QBnwrhLB2DeZt7uStaF5vwQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx9BxpaCTIqgGBjC/uBLlXwbd979CDTn4trekEyzw2oYm8go1FaQPSBqIAhLHF/Qu2Ny6VTJA==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:f750:: with SMTP id f16mr13259311pgk.292.1626492274938; Fri, 16 Jul 2021 20:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:1188:5b01:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:1188:5b01:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c5sm11894960pfn.144.2021.07.16.20.24.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Jul 2021 20:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, cbor@ietf.org
References: <YPGg6rnN6H3feUYx@hephaistos.amsuess.com> <CALaySJK4-xQLpcaucyMb=w1b27X+VEwMQn-8ONawRJ4bJ=rWQQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f2162cdb-761c-d1dd-0d10-ff98dfaa4001@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 15:24:30 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJK4-xQLpcaucyMb=w1b27X+VEwMQn-8ONawRJ4bJ=rWQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/zl7uTlqWvoWt4ElHMLEh48IR1fU>
Subject: Re: [Cbor] =?utf-8?q?=F0=9F=94=94_WGLC_with_request_for_reviews_on_c?= =?utf-8?q?bor-network-addresses-05?=
X-BeenThere: cbor@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Concise Binary Object Representation \(CBOR\)" <cbor.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cbor/>
List-Post: <mailto:cbor@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor>, <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2021 03:24:41 -0000

Hi,

This is by way of an implementation report. I have a demo implementation
of RFC8992 (Autonomic IPv6 Edge Prefix Management in Large-Scale Networks) and I just made a version of it that uses Tags 52 and 54 instead of the format defined in the RFC.
Up and running on this machine as I type. It only uses the 3rd format for each tag (address followed by prefix length) so it isn't a complete implementation, but anyway it works.**

Code at https://github.com/becarpenter/graspy/blob/master/pfxm4.py

So, I've reviewed the draft and it's ready to go.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

** It says things like:
_MainThread 3532 IPv6 pool size 6 /64s 
_MainThread 3532 IPv4 pool size 10 /24s 
delegator 4948 1190 prefixes were delegated 
_MainThread 3532 IPv6 prefix pool is low, will ask for /61 
delegator 4948 1200 prefixes were delegated 
_MainThread 3532 Trying the only peer 
_MainThread 3532 Obtained 2001:db8:ffff:fde8::/61 
_MainThread 3532 IPv4 prefix pool is low, will ask for /20 
_MainThread 3532 Trying the only peer 
_MainThread 3532 Obtained 10.255.64.0/20 
_MainThread 3532 IPv6 pool size 7 /64s 
_MainThread 3532 IPv4 pool size 23 /24s 
delegator 4948 1220 prefixes were delegated 

On 17-Jul-21 03:23, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Hello CBOR group,
> 
> This mail marks the start of a two week working group last call on
> cbor-network-addresses[1], which will end at the CBOR meeting of
> IETF111.
> 
> While this document has been discussed during interims and on the
> list, the number of participants discussing it so far is small.  I'd
> appreciate a few more reviews on this before we proceed with it.
> 
> Everyone, please have a look at the latest version  -- it's small,
> just a few pages of actual content -- and post a review to the list.
> Even, "I've reviewed it and it's ready to go," is useful.
> 
> Thanks,
> Barry
> 
> [1]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CBOR mailing list
> CBOR@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cbor
>