Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-core-hop-limit-05

[Jaime Jiménez <[e-mail]>]

Dear Roni,

I believe the CUNR bit mask is defined in 5.4.6 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7252#page-39
I assume it has to be added for every new option defined. 

Ciao!

On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 05:10:51AM -0700, Roni Even via Datatracker wrote:
> Reviewer: Roni Even
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-core-hop-limit-??
> Reviewer: Roni Even
> Review Date: 2019-09-22
> IETF LC End Date: 2019-09-27
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary:
> The document is ready for publication as a standard track RFC with nits
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> In section 6.2 I am not sure why you have CUNR , I did not see these values in
> RFC7252 section 12.2 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7252#section-12.2  or in
> the registry
> 
>          +--------+---+---+---+---+------------------+-----------+
>          | Number | C | U | N | R | Name             | Reference |
>          +--------+---+---+---+---+------------------+-----------+
>          |  TBA2  |   |   |   |   | Hop-Limit        | [RFCXXXX] |
>          +--------+---+---+---+---+------------------+-----------+
>              C=Critical, U=Unsafe, N=NoCacheKey, R=Repeatable
> 
>