Re: [Gen-art] Russ Housley's Discuss on draft-ietf-pim-port [Was: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pim-port-09.txt]

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 03 January 2012 22:07 UTC

From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Stig Venaas' <svenaas@cisco.com>, 'Russ Housley' <housley@vigilsec.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 22:07:47 -0000
Message-ID: <01c001ccca64$216a80b0$643f8210$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: AczKY9qdJSV7YvPgQruFFm37L/EuAA==
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: 'General Area Review Team' <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-pim-port.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Russ Housley's Discuss on draft-ietf-pim-port [Was: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-pim-port-09.txt]
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk

In the hope that the change (acceptable to Suresh) will work for Russ, I have
entered the RFC Editor note.

A

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stig Venaas [mailto:svenaas@cisco.com]
> Sent: 03 January 2012 17:27
> To: Russ Housley
> Cc: Suresh Krishnan; adrian@olddog.co.uk;
draft-ietf-pim-port.all@tools.ietf.org;
> General Area Review Team
> Subject: Re: Russ's Discs on draft-ietf-pim-port [Was: Gen-ART Telechat review
of
> draft-ietf-pim-port-09.txt]
> 
> Russ, I've sent 3-4 emails in December asking if your discuss can be
> resolved, but no response. I hope you can respond now.
> 
> Stig
> 
> On 11/28/2011 11:07 AM, Stig Venaas (svenaas) wrote:
> > On 11/29/2011 10:18 AM, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
> >  > Hi Stig,
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > On 11/28/2011 12:59 PM, Stig Venaas wrote:
> >  >>> Please note that the Connection ID AFI in the PORT Hello Option
> > does not
> >  >>> need to match the address family of PIM Hello message that carries it.
> >  >>> e.g. an IPv6 PIM Hello message could contain a PORT Hello Option with a
> >  >>> TCP Connection ID AFI of 1 (IPv4).
> >  >>
> >  >> While I am OK with this text, wouldn't it be better to add this to 3.1
> >  >> and 3.2 where we formally define the hello options?
> >  >>
> >  >> My proposal would be:
> >  >>
> >  >> End of 3.1:
> >  >>
> >  >> OLD:
> >  >> TCP Connection ID AFI: The AFI value to describe the address-family
> >  >> of the address of the TCP Connection ID field. When this field is
> >  >> 0, a mechanism outside the scope of this document is used to
> >  >> obtain the addresses used to establish the TCP connection.
> >  >>
> >  >> NEW:
> >  >> TCP Connection ID AFI: The AFI value to describe the address-family
> >  >> of the address of the TCP Connection ID field. Note that this
> >  >> value does not need to match the address-family of the PIM Hello
> >  >> message that carries it. When this field is 0, a mechanism
> >  >> outside the scope of this document is used to obtain the
> >  >> addresses used to establish the TCP connection.
> >  >>
> >  >> End of 3.2:
> >  >>
> >  >> OLD:
> >  >> SCTP Connection ID AFI: The AFI value to describe the address-
> >  >> family of the address of the SCTP Connection ID field. When this
> >  >> field is 0, a mechanism outside the scope of this document is used
> >  >> to obtain the addresses used to establish the SCTP connection.
> >  >>
> >  >> NEW:
> >  >> SCTP Connection ID AFI: The AFI value to describe the address-
> >  >> family of the address of the SCTP Connection ID field. Note that
> >  >> this value does not need to match the address-family of the PIM
> >  >> Hello message that carries it. When this field is 0, a mechanism
> >  >> outside the scope of this document is used to obtain the
> >  >> addresses used to establish the SCTP connection.
> >  >>
> >  >> What do you think?
> >  >
> >  > This works great.
> >
> > Great, I hope we can then just add a note for the editor, and that the
> > discuss can be cleared...
> >
> > Stig
> >
> >  >
> >  > Thanks
> >  > Suresh
> >

Re: [Gen-art] Russ Housley's Discuss on draft-iet… Adrian Farrel