IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] [BULK] AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-14

Christoph Loibl <c@tix.at> Mon, 12 October 2020 12:26 UTC

Return-Path: <c@tix.at>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7603A1446; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 05:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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=tix.at
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 8axDShAypX-d; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 05:26:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.fbsd.host (mail.fbsd.host [IPv6:2001:858:58::22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 451973A1444; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 05:26:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tix.at; s=rev1; h=References:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type :Message-Id:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=uMMV8C/IP/NJ1IHhBOCc4uDKenv7B11MUKpLck7YNmU=; b=l88LtqxttGC0sJqmUPDwk8OIuR g5o+erBr619ctM41moYOBtT1XLylJ1SuMcGjS4Z9IEpPCtTi4kt6F4FsQ1kUCpDuaEFVJErmNNq8g bYY02nQsODWFQP34x+hx/2nCYTPgMU2yeuFkWkZZVZp9b9PHv7SJgEbMle0S5rPRFU2WeKoFUdeJE +k/umWM4y2OI/SDaisaam2M46fP8x2nsOfVEaQj6d8Sz6EF3o0V8btZDrlJ1ZkXbrxU6Ljo0PtcWU Gks5o2rnRe16S6mTPS7nmtoSJ5hgc9CpQq51ADlHUOXEgWOmDAFnXr3qiZXA5ApxCma6RcwP7ONkW 5GCoKjKA==;
Received: from 80-110-113-91.cgn.dynamic.surfer.at ([80.110.113.91] helo=[192.168.64.150]) by mail.fbsd.host with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from <c@tix.at>) id 1kRwu9-000Hpa-CY; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:26:18 +0200
From: Christoph Loibl <c@tix.at>
Message-Id: <240FA6B7-A261-41A5-ACCA-F454C2207AEE@tix.at>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6A22AAD0-B12A-406B-BD5A-3B10DF3936E5"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:26:16 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESsyc5hhq9T_9w8f8uX+X2647HFF0SsRvoHNqQvV+_4fNsg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6@ietf.org, idr-chairs@ietf.org, IDR List <idr@ietf.org>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <CAMMESswsbgV3pJJU7i=9F3N3w2zc6--oCVtxrVXKd3APg3+zhw@mail.gmail.com> <CA851932-4E1B-4882-B8F3-842BB5E288DA@tix.at> <CAMMESsyc5hhq9T_9w8f8uX+X2647HFF0SsRvoHNqQvV+_4fNsg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
X-Scanned-By: primary on mail.fbsd.host (78.142.178.22); Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:26:17 +0200
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/-pTkd-_jucXoxq8pjWdwtN8QGEc>
Subject: Re: [Idr] [BULK] AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-14
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:26:25 -0000

Hi Alvaro,

Thanks for the review. I just uploaded the changed -16 as requested. This should fix 2 issues that you raised.

RFCdiff gives (in this case) a rather good overview of the changes.

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-15&url2=draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-16

Cheers Christoph

-- 
Christoph Loibl
c@tix.at | CL8-RIPE | PGP-Key-ID: 0x4B2C0055 | http://www.nextlayer.at



> On 07.10.2020, at 18:42, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On September 21, 2020 at 3:15:16 AM, Christoph Loibl wrote:
> 
> 
> Christoph:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> 
> ...
>> We worked on the issues that you raised and I just uploaded a -15 that
>> addresses the issues you raised. All issues have been tracked on Github and
>> the commits mention the assigned issue#:
> 
> I have just a couple of comments below.
> 
> The main one is related to the updated registry, and the need to
> formally update rfc5575bis.  I think this should be a quick/simple
> change, so I am starting the IETF LC -- please do make the change as
> soon as possible so IANA has an up-to-date copy to work with.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Alvaro.
> 
> 
> 
> ...
>>> 151 3.1. Type 1 - Destination IPv6 Prefix
> ...
>> Added explicit individual description of the fields. Also edited the list
>> so that it is clear that we have optional padding and a pattern that gets
>> matched.
>> -->
> 
> This is the new text for §3.1 (with comments):
> 
> 
> 147	3.1.  Type 1 - Destination IPv6 Prefix
> ...
> 160	   length -  The length field indicates the N-th leftmost bit in the
> 161	      address where bitwise pattern matching stops.
> 
> [] "leftmost"  Can we use "most significant", or something like that?
> I don't remember seeing "leftmost" used in this way.
> 
> 163	   offset -  The offset field indicates the number of leftmost address
> 164	      bits to skip before bitwise pattern matching starts.
> 
> [] Same comment about "leftmost".
> 
> 
> ...
> 174	   Length minus offset must always be 0 or more, otherwise this
> 175	   component is malformed.
> 
> [major] If length minus offset is 0, then there's no pattern to match.
> Does that result in "match anything/everything" or "match nothing"?
> 
> 
> 
> ...
>>> 393 8. IANA Considerations
> ...
>> Changed IANA considerations to merge IPv4/IPv6 FS types into one registry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email