Re: [6lo] Last Call: <draft-ietf-6lo-6lobac-06.txt> (Transmission of IPv6 over MS/TP Networks) to Proposed Standard
worley@ariadne.com (Dale R. Worley) Tue, 28 February 2017 18:52 UTC
Return-Path: <worley@alum.mit.edu>
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 B491912967F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:52:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.934
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.934 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 GKIZt7gBekuC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resqmta-po-11v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-11v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:170]) (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 6D823129681 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:52:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resomta-po-06v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.230]) by resqmta-po-11v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id imsbc3XtmesrQimtEcEeK1; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:52:48 +0000
Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com ([IPv6:2601:192:4603:9471:222:fbff:fe91:d396]) by resomta-po-06v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP id imtCccwy5oqz9imtDcZ86z; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:52:48 +0000
Received: from hobgoblin.ariadne.com (hobgoblin.ariadne.com [127.0.0.1]) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id v1SIqj2W032447; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 13:52:45 -0500
Received: (from worley@localhost) by hobgoblin.ariadne.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id v1SIqjDi032444; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 13:52:45 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: hobgoblin.ariadne.com: worley set sender to worley@alum.mit.edu using -f
From: worley@ariadne.com
To: Kerry Lynn <kerlyn@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: [6lo] Last Call: <draft-ietf-6lo-6lobac-06.txt> (Transmission of IPv6 over MS/TP Networks) to Proposed Standard
In-Reply-To: <CABOxzu3EeOCF7mmpxB88b4+NE5SzFrPVDzLa=KqOQenwSezQfw@mail.gmail.com> (kerlyn@ieee.org)
Sender: worley@ariadne.com
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 13:52:45 -0500
Message-ID: <87wpcajgg2.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfBpORgYfZ059naQc8GnNOvEEJpWlj7Pm5iEWjb5YGC3KpyT+N4mXwss3C4hkpU8VmOAtTXHOwALm8wCiF7RLU0wyzZoCEcqCREmYw4Py7fRc7Aoplgjk 1Srr6f+/ArEwqfTm2rRtj6wyshQ+G+RvNT6DwLY7hB8zllOXileHlf0x/sWPuIWGam/30XP0nJauhxTa3JkPqG93LogdtBHWeynSvR4FCOln1sjSWN5RuQYR eiwFZMN89amZfRlZQwygOw==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/nScpEEhGndweBL5KHbNiAofrRJM>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6lo-6lobac@ietf.org, 6lo@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: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:52:51 -0000
Kerry Lynn <kerlyn@ieee.org> writes: > Thanks for your thorough review of draft-ietf-6lo-6lobac. Sorry that > it has taken so long to get back to you. Can you take a look at the > new version and see if it addresses your concerns? Comments inline... Yes, the -07 cleans up all my concerns. > Section 6 has been reworked to more clearly distinguish between two types > of IIDs: "MAC-address-derived" and "semantically opaque". The first is > recommended for link-local addresses because it enables maximum IPv6 > header compression efficiency. Since MS/TP is used primarily as a field > bus, I expect most installations will only ever involve link-local traffic > between an MS/TP device and a local controller. > > For applications where the MS/TP device is a client or server with routable > addresses, the spec strongly recommends generating a semantically opaque > IID, with 64 bits of entropy, for each global address. Ah, yes, that's the distinction that makes it clear. > ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 135-2016 was published late last year. This > version integrates the changes that were standardized in 135-2012 > Addendum an, so there's no longer any jumping back and forth between > references. And so you simplified the references to Std. 135 . Dale
- [6lo] Last Call: <draft-ietf-6lo-6lobac-06.txt> (… Dale R. Worley
- Re: [6lo] Last Call: <draft-ietf-6lo-6lobac-06.tx… Kerry Lynn
- Re: [6lo] Last Call: <draft-ietf-6lo-6lobac-06.tx… Dale R. Worley