Re: [Int-dir] Review of draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-03

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Mon, 16 January 2017 18:40 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5855312960C; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:40:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 XuK3G6xlnMwE; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:40:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x244.google.com (mail-qt0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::244]) (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 D10381295FA; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:40:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x244.google.com with SMTP id a29so15875211qtb.1; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:40:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=iYDrKVLDNU1cBirnMncIqo6MMZiVB/htki+ZJri4W38=; b=KJB62TbtBEcXrUEpHcNzPM6A/n72GY0mGp7sJXIVRirw5v9YyDV8ZJnxYyFTw9Ae58 jgPKcP2Yv3eKgPOhePUpUuIB6sE9sHwnzj3mOmyLfsoGG5SrgSngV7rqACEk/CC8M8GZ GjRcgb0FVfVZrPf/P5IX/YayqWnexlBqBJRZH1zsysXwRKfEP14mtAWjepFFI+YGz0kn 8paQ2O7aUmFi87sm+IN3JPRh2x9pv4xLKuKb39rQv+jxcvTjD/w9sCAr1WnobCPATSl8 bs+3Cff2PUalo4ueFNjJXAAer6thEJuNTI1lNFgdXMzotaCU1H36zy9InvORc9qnw4EO uxMw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iYDrKVLDNU1cBirnMncIqo6MMZiVB/htki+ZJri4W38=; b=LcEvfUwqABCNvActbBnv/J994kuw5GSLsZqXOACZJIaB+GeM76rOyh8JteFeRaruYm /7tGWLjQ0iB0hfiWzAaIKzTV+2wSomCyG1lrtG+fECW4ySyGYIfWZSV3UKeM/AWunAnJ N/pEB4rsmbcnj7K4AQicqNPrN571/YqOB7thqGYaLPlEDG/gv5/q8gK5rTgFLGCqQL/f YprUJOXjE9glJWcztIJBFvSOkNjq2oGK0IL6aHJMbKjNVsaDp5FZZwEj/kvf3n2Z6OdM J7H3aiXYXGJlzLTtbe7Ooxa4TD/U820Pc/88cR1I5E11ueSjacU7pEpNs+p7qBc6KcqJ +ZMw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJBIjMZ4uw2zZcNdBiosiieC0Htvd5QLCy0WHwG7c6z9DdO4d8Ha81C8sYOMIHBNPEghjdWIdMcY/U2KA==
X-Received: by 10.55.45.129 with SMTP id t123mr30190631qkh.311.1484592039680; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:40:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.237.60.29 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:40:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <2cb3f151-f2c3-539f-fcc4-a40f64916bee@earthlink.net>
References: <148372972401.17454.8580929833890158319.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2cb3f151-f2c3-539f-fcc4-a40f64916bee@earthlink.net>
From: =?UTF-8?B?56We5piO6YGU5ZOJ?= <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 10:40:39 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: u5LJNL1WeGSwfJ-W0t9RRfNONoM
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqeF1z9m95UYonts3+NVRwfUgWxByF0a852B-BH1+eBGrA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Int-dir] Review of draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-03
To: Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1-dCCjUDX9yhP6frP52l3fsRAfM>
Cc: Tatuya Jinmei <Jinmei_Tatuya@isc.org>, draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids.all@ietf.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, dmm@ietf.org, "<int-dir@ietf.org>" <int-dir@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 18:40:42 -0000

At Sun, 15 Jan 2017 21:08:41 -0800,
Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net> wrote:

> > - Section 4.5
> >
> >     2000, modulo 2^32.  Since the link-layer address can be of
> > variable
> >     length [RFC2464], the DUID-LLT is of variable length.
> >
> >    I don't understand why RFC2464 is referenced in this context.  This
> >    RFC is about IPv6 over Ethernet, and assumes a fixed (6 bytes)
> >    length of hardware address.
>
> I don't quite know what to do about this.  I actually just copied this
> language from RFC 3315.  I think that the citation is also wrong in RFC
> 3315, for the same reason as given here.  I could simply delete the
> reference to RFC 2464.

I don't see "Since the link-layer address can be of variable length
[RFC2464], the DUID-LLT is of variable length." in RFC3315.  See also
the followup comment by Bernie.  Deleting the reference will certainly
address my concern, and I personally don't mind not having a reference
here.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya