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

Alvaro Retana <> Wed, 07 October 2020 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796BE3A0A3F; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 09:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mrlhD6-T7QfJ; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 09:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07B2E3A0ADA; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 09:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id l16so2874006eds.3; Wed, 07 Oct 2020 09:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mcSkou9zb2nAey/RmWT67lQT7+c6h3sj/baLEWWdBdg=; b=Ri+yhVsfWhBbidpwQ9VfWGSdRqijMYfYHJ0Fx0Olg73k03Fk/3RkeD+u0Mhq5g1b3f CcJDHS4EaKjIqBiEynO81tQXkS71bJSWienpHEhCUqDXZVUbmGYK1XDsH8gJDWpSzVE8 WZY3M9rN2eFgBnIwcUTWEsl4PmV/RMZFBS/DABjC4YprBF//+3tlGMPt2nscMI9vuCr2 /7PndbUcF9/ObJdVABk+KtCFRyJP3VDNZOxgRQrkmWKQeAKwXkFF+b0jX9PbvI0SffQe hxKkmjuGB4Oi4Q/KegZTO0VHyK7Q6ya5OyFQ3qisfTe0FyCAvOHZX6NuAv9Ag9DX1MTY gghw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mcSkou9zb2nAey/RmWT67lQT7+c6h3sj/baLEWWdBdg=; b=IGQnmxm+aP5ZZqrOx5UsjYLG/YC+5H1Yf6hLUAPIAldk3DIkPf0BFCyReDb9JjoFVO NlKlN3WT9wr2rXJjZq7h65EAlNuSU03hlSoSuyhyrRXVel+h3yIP6T7L0PsBVQQFE04X /bPa9OhlrMUSuu+t86pEyF+4DEgjQbuPlq4yA5kIJOdNyCxDDz9w1GC36zm5EZjjPld4 5lB8KfckaUBT4ZQiMNnQmSqUfWSrnL26bUBGBe5sobAf4ErdYajjYQeO+wDTNOCObYjr Dqbpx77E5Xu7UyRCxp5murMzlsN5onCm0EJ6cHfc4Chauhe2Nn8b6a4DfaSByLq3CxMd CrOw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Sb6ee6KJRhG14TiCD716FqYWQ8iI7Sp/Zqk5u+MAbLJgviGme sDjQEDw4npvZsXnsCMTdAPTKlcaOmI9pLaTXDHRl+Js8
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwQBJ9oQsIBTzQJ4u1Ll3Q6CemPE0PwtUj2/i+slsgvTWGzB/cUxD7OuAGFbVKgg6om3M/fdLQPJfHgMs0GloM=
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c347:: with SMTP id j7mr4694639edr.353.1602088958303; Wed, 07 Oct 2020 09:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by with HTTPREST; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 09:42:37 -0700
From: Alvaro Retana <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2020 09:42:37 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Christoph Loibl <>
Cc:,, IDR List <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Idr] AD Review of draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-14
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2020 16:42:42 -0000

On September 21, 2020 at 3:15:16 AM, Christoph Loibl wrote:



> 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.



> > 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.

Comments/questions about that:

(1) Because this document is changing the registry defined in
rfc5575bis, then we need to formally Update it.  Please add the
indication in the header, and a sentence in the Abstract: "This
documents updates rfc5575bis by changing the Flow Spec Component Types

(2) §8.1: please indicate that the registration procedure does not change.

(3) [this document] should also be listed as a reference in all the
assigned and reserved entries with an IPv6 name.