From nobody Mon Sep 11 22:58:58 2023 Return-Path: X-Original-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39ACC151530 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 22:58:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.108 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nict.go.jp Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hql2FqTyhoI9 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 22:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mo-csw.securemx.jp (mo-csw1120.securemx.jp [210.130.202.131]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DDABC15152C for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2023 22:58:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nict.go.jp; h=Content-Type: Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Message-Id:References:To;i=asaeda@nict.go.jp;s=key1.smx;t=1694498305;x= 1695707905; bh=vCK4FiMMmZftJCuiLLF1YI+vVvXxIj5+fOkhI0AnRf8=; b=we9JsxMaQikxuiZk UssjrMzQQvmKbz/6oGfwn78EPJUEwRuNm+hLQKxedMrYHA4SirEtXcuFMUZZXK7K/sSWn+iTmdWuH FmYm3tKZ4PmWqXHQ0CDND9Ehz23P3EKjmdJzxV93Tm4Xp6tGEMuM4NUW8WcnfUQ/HyOCy8nZN4XLa aKaz3fYZnYO4EFbrHO/NnGMsyfWBff23L642YCx7pdDvgvIbggKTcMCqCYa7ENrzQkfiOrup3vut6 MTlF43LpqInlzv6KIOwl41XJtzWj7AOr7NADBv4leSFyrCfYT+MkzaxsJc6Oyw+/DeEQebPtEKaVY EX32oimypIfcKqDFSQ==; Received: by mo-csw.securemx.jp (mx-mo-csw1120) id 38C5wPeA1758387; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 14:58:25 +0900 X-Iguazu-Qid: 2rWg4AOIlQ42csQJpF X-Iguazu-QSIG: v=2; s=0; t=1694498304; q=2rWg4AOIlQ42csQJpF; m=4gBuNyBpc/hGPgYXTiLioBQlOYJ2tG0QQoLTtPzt934= Received: from mail2.nict.go.jp (mail2.nict.go.jp [133.243.18.15]) by relay.securemx.jp (mx-mr1121) id 38C5wNg2601307 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 12 Sep 2023 14:58:24 +0900 Received: from smtpclient.apple (ssh1.nict.go.jp [133.243.3.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.nict.go.jp (NICT Mail Spool Server2) with ESMTPSA id C455319150; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 14:58:23 +0900 (JST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.4\)) From: Hitoshi Asaeda In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 14:58:23 +0900 Cc: icnrg@irtf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <50A22A97-206E-4E3E-BD30-35BF8C6DD85A@nict.go.jp> To: drafts-expert-review@iana.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.4) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [icnrg] [IANA #1280061] expert review for draft-irtf-icnrg-pathsteering (ccnx) X-BeenThere: icnrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: Information-Centric Networking research group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 05:58:56 -0000 Hi folks and pathsteering draft authors, I reviewed the pathsteering draft and have couple of comments. At first I'd like to ask about the following Table 2 mentioned in = section 3.3 (Path label encoding for NDN). Flag (Suggested) Value (hex) T_PATH_LABEL 0x0A T_PATH_LABEL_FLAGS 0x0B T_PATH_LABEL_BITMAP 0x0D T_PATH_LABEL_NEXTHOP_LABEL 0x0E T_PATH_LABEL_HOP_COUNT 0x0F Table 2: TLV-TYPE number assignments Except T_PATH_LABEL, there are no explanation about these types in this = draft. What are these labels used? It is necessary to explain all of = these types and scenarios how they use. Even though this section title is with NDN (not CCNx), you are asking = the IANA assignment for these five type values in CCNx registry. You may = want to move this table to a different section. In IANA consideration section, the authors say; "1. Please assign the value 0x0004 (if still available) for T_PATH_LABEL = in the CCNx Hop-by-Hop Types registry established by [RFC8609]." But 0x0004 is already reserved by rfc8609, meaning it is not available. = Instead you can request 0x000A. BTW, you mentioned T_PATH_LABEL in Table = 2. Are they same even though you assigned different values in this = section (0x0004) and Table 2 (0x0A)? "4. Please create the CCNx Path Label Flags registry and assign the = values listed in Table 1. The registration procedure for this registry = should be "Specification Required" as defined in [RFC8126]." My question is where the CCNx Path Label Flags are specified in a CCNx = packet? Under which TLV field, this new TLV field is encoded?=20 Going back to section 3.1 (Path label TLV), two type values, = T_RETURN_INVALID_PATH_LABEL and T_RETURN_MALFORMED_INTEREST, are defined = for interest return. But only T_RETURN_INVALID_PATH_LABEL is mentioned = in the IANA section. I think it is necessary to revise the draft. Regards, Hitoshi > On Sep 5, 2023, at 3:36, Amanda Baber via RT = wrote: >=20 > Hi Hitoshi (cc: ICNRG), >=20 > Sorry, looks like I didn't copy the list on my initial request! Adding = them now.=20 >=20 > thanks, > Amanda >=20 > On Sun Sep 03 06:29:48 2023, asaeda@nict.go.jp wrote: >> Dear Amanda, >>=20 >> I'll reply you before Sep. 14. >> (Were your mail sent to ICNRG ML?) >>=20 >> Regards, >>=20 >> Hitoshi >>=20 >>> On Sep 1, 2023, at 9:52, Amanda Baber via RT >> review@iana.org> wrote: >>>=20 >>> Dear Hitoshi (cc: ICNRG), >>>=20 >>> As a designated expert for the "CCNx Interest Return Code Types" >>> registry, can you review the proposed registration in this document >>> for us? >>>=20 >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-icnrg-pathsteering >>>=20 >>> The due date is September 14th. >>>=20 >>> If this is OK, when we're asked to implement the registry actions = for >>> this document, we'll make the registration at >>>=20 >>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/ccnx >>>=20 >>> With thanks, >>>=20 >>> Amanda Baber >>> IANA Operations Manager >>>=20 >>>=20 >=20