IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Document shepherd comments on 'draft-ietf-intarea-gue-05'

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Tue, 28 August 2018 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4A60130DF7 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:48:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Hn1m0u-AAiMI for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:48:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com (mail-qk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) (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 AAA88130DE6 for <Int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:48:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id 89-v6so1309941qkp.2 for <Int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:48:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oat78HzOI/TIjbS7DeKt+xCvIy7FmE62W/tzsib9g8I=; b=gEKhL7K24UuyXyCRrf3C/238oV7G+wlnpS8a3p1jMC0wYYKNeztOYv4FBT3J4fPCPW kUJRvKJ2yrftX4u3v8QzGyjnNzxdLEKORrZvDlTPyGR2bfqV+nsMS43H6azTI0neKOri 4ScytG8KqmeRchvJs+Am1cDht+n+0N2qeq+UdGxprn/UXew0Muv5nz/sVXsQROyuySCf dzSJp6dU4oPVQHZ1UGk3rxzo2QcG/dqTEYN2yPSWU+ZKTohazBXZ1d5sGsNgXDviWMBz cxEkiuyyn6z9NIKHNsKfnjnkKiJNuYgrhrXvF1GLSkmX1PwmiuiCjcnrJXUNJ2FGcciT kZIw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oat78HzOI/TIjbS7DeKt+xCvIy7FmE62W/tzsib9g8I=; b=JpVupcElnt157TqeNTlH0BPWiXjAxDnr7IMbbFq8DHDBumLDUlIaYaIjpgSJtuTrWZ zxhf98D8lh+JcBCFf3MKW+1RBBxUDHgvI0dPnMehzJSf+r9dSFgx+J7Af2h/iK0/fqWO BCKsX5CTavO92CxEjp9aMVN+zedsM/ihgG0ejvUQmCxUpz2LbIoK1/IYUkkFxhWADimf AkcSirOxaP2lXD1+Z1jXBjHDjTsk1Aggr7jkaQlSb+1F56imMZ4xcUpXJx6/V4OlGcdl RGdZBj0gCGXkFOayTfvlWhURuTDSfZ1ncCNB0NOE/h20U3bTn4qk8MEhGqdGULmoiGjX iIGQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51C2n/wFNdL3xY7PTgzP7Fn+jwe7PgnNxUKQUWAltbwSkixUyu+3 nVi+Zbd+27OASMRtv1wZTQnUWTKPXa/rI6AlNnny7Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdYWRcURQ7B4HjaHR1JCZ/PFAhC67uP1unVRRstcfPg5lM6lbAb2GwnNRUtjVDD1qtU5AK92W/S07x6tCM987Kg=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:5a06:: with SMTP id o6-v6mr2243704qkb.44.1535471279688; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:ac8:3312:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:47:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <371b25b557e3698ea4635289df7bdb0a@strayalpha.com>
References: <f1cf017dec464a8c8d2cd0dc3e6d60db@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <371b25b557e3698ea4635289df7bdb0a@strayalpha.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 08:47:59 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S37z1vj19etoF979W=Xr0OpVmWMnM4RzdDWSea61AFxCHA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, int-area <Int-area@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/ohOBMYaxbBd1PF-uPA3WdeJjPVc>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Document shepherd comments on 'draft-ietf-intarea-gue-05'
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 15:48:04 -0000

On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> wrote:
> Some comments below, hopefully constructive/additive...
>
> Joe
>
>
>
>
> On 2018-08-24 12:34, Templin (US), Fred L wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> As document shepherd, I am required to perform a review. Please see below
> for initial comments, and respond on the list.
>
> Fred
>
> ---
>
> ...
>
> Section by Section comments:
>
> ...
>
> Section 5.4.1:
> Second paragraph, "set 94 for IPIP", I was under the impression that the
> common
> values for IPIP encapsulation are '4' for IPv4 and '41' for IPv6. I have not
> seen '94'
> appear elsewhere. Is this a common use? If not, would it be better to use
> '4' or '41'?
>
>
> 94 is defined here:
>
>    [IDM91a] Ioannidis, J., Duchamp, D., Maguire, G., "IP-based
>             protocols for mobile internetworking", Proceedings of
>             SIGCOMM '91, ACM, September 1991.
>
> See RFC 1853 for a list of other "non-4" and "non-6" IP tunnels, but these
> are not IP-in-IP -- that should cite RFC2003 (though, as noted in
> draft-ietf-tunnels, there are some issues with the details in that RFC).

I think it's probably better to use 4 and show the example as IPv4/IP
encapsulation since that's probably more common.

Thanks,
Tom

>
> Joe
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>

v2.2.0 | Report a Bug | By Email