IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error code options

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Wed, 15 November 2017 00:42 UTC

Return-Path: <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FE7812940D for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:42:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 YYPygaPbQBaS for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:42:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (dawn.hardakers.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:187::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D4C41200B9 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:42:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (dhcp-92bb.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.146.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5C7D28090; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:42:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net>
Cc: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>, tjw ietf <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
References: <yblpo9md8fk.fsf@wu.hardakers.net> <CADyWQ+G-e+zqGkFK7vPQdXBDRvyv-Gxw75N1z+A6L8ULR=+izQ@mail.gmail.com> <26DB1BD1-A877-482A-83B3-7A7F673AAB4A@apnic.net> <3FFE9D39-DD16-4863-9F9B-46D585F90BF1@hopcount.ca> <9EAE2E1F-CE2E-4F9F-92B2-1FE2A6023492@apnic.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 16:40:09 -0800
In-Reply-To: <9EAE2E1F-CE2E-4F9F-92B2-1FE2A6023492@apnic.net> (Geoff Huston's message of "Tue, 14 Nov 2017 08:37:55 +1100")
Message-ID: <yblinecs7bq.fsf@wu.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/25.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Td7V6YpKj9j9qNktYyk6AGWR3PQ>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error code options
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:42:30 -0000

Geoff Huston <gih@apnic.net> writes:

>> I think the number 4 on the slide was different from the one in the mail.
>
>
> I thought so too, but I wasn’t sure if it was me not paying attention
> in the WG meeting or not!

Yes, you're both right.  And absolutely my bad for writing the
presentation without looking at the mail I sent and synchronizing the
numbering.

The preferred option in the room was the 16-bit value that would be used
in combination with the rcode to indicate the full meaning of the
extension value.
-- 
Wes Hardaker
USC/ISI

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email