IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-rfc7752bis-14: (with COMMENT)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Fri, 17 February 2023 12:06 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 1924EC14CF1F; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 04:06:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.095
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.095 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 pNXZHUsgKO0a; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 04:06:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1915EC14CE2C; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 04:06:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:7d40:4f11:d182:a060]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F5EF1D2F8B; Fri, 17 Feb 2023 14:05:58 +0200 (EET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1676635558; bh=UWYpVvvpoFIuUtM418DFI2fKgwI10Gjy6hgR6Mnjf6A=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=nBTTj7cM0hO1UFZ+83WGfq+D5IPgQHhsm13dkPbHKMqaLI2a6GISU/Rn67CX7c2hW WJ6XQXd9OyMG6uOUBn8TaErkqsIZnCacwWyPRPP7bUfmCbBpGnKc1bCZX7LNCfcJWK Py1J69WV4t+yGUrvyjZ1NDKercGgj9y4XxFYUaf4=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_78C72668-8707-4A24-9F3E-048D40689B31"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.400.51.1.1\))
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAH6gdPyY-ehzPkjdT21kH79UFxMEicUjinE1CqoubY8ba1ZYkg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2023 14:05:53 +0200
Cc: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-idr-rfc7752bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-idr-rfc7752bis@ietf.org>, "idr-chairs@ietf.org" <idr-chairs@ietf.org>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, "shares@ndzh.com" <shares@ndzh.com>, "jhaas@pfrc.org" <jhaas@pfrc.org>, "aretana.ietf@gmail.com" <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <AD1F14EF-9825-4940-B53E-61F41F61F4F3@eggert.org>
References: <167110933347.47168.7067488022979786336@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAH6gdPz-CV3ThFJ8+iOC+MpbE3cdgPdF99zbhFej507Zh-U3JA@mail.gmail.com> <BY5PR11MB4196C72F9B02D64D989EC4B3B5A19@BY5PR11MB4196.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAH6gdPyY-ehzPkjdT21kH79UFxMEicUjinE1CqoubY8ba1ZYkg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 9F5EF1D2F8B.A930B
X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/eQDvxvmoX0Pr37hIPHVH2J6FUHo>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-rfc7752bis-14: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 17 Feb 2023 12:06:11 -0000

Hi,

On Feb 17, 2023, at 14:00, Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed, this is the equivalent of memcmp. Don't both memcmp and strcmp follow lexicographical order in comparison? The difference is about strcmp terminating on '\0' while memcmp doesn't?

this is the same issue we're discussing over on the other thread.

memcmp requires that the memory regions are of the same length, which I don't think may always be the case here?

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email