RE: Updates to RFC6434

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Mon, 30 October 2017 23:46 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7616613F58C for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 b2To5vJOdTAn for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:46:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.184.178]) (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 0E80413F588 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:46:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id v9UNkPMQ052357; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:46:25 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com [137.136.239.220]) by phx-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id v9UNkGB1051928 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:46:16 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8988:eede::8988:eede) by XCH15-06-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:8988:efdc::8988:efdc) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:46:15 -0700
Received: from XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.136.238.222]) by XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com ([137.136.238.222]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 16:46:15 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>
CC: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Updates to RFC6434
Thread-Topic: Updates to RFC6434
Thread-Index: AQHTUYUM7Yt7hhS0AUynTqYnnBzBvqL8yXlwgAB4SQD//4/toIAAe7AA//+N8dCAAKWTgP//iwfQ
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:46:15 +0000
Message-ID: <93f56f72a9f04a0998fd6fc1a5d7170a@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <CAOSSMjUVCSBjbYu3bc7DU+edz2+0+RvU_AMi4FNn2n2075kk9g@mail.gmail.com> <647efa67a24f4511ab1968ec6c9227ac@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAOSSMjUZcNwk2_UhBfD63Dz2Er9qrNmK9Qb-+z0mRtEPgs+9Gw@mail.gmail.com> <27453115328b4e4f88c79bc3c989ad55@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <F606F642-2DF5-4D82-B55F-77549A8E8770@jisc.ac.uk> <e49037987ad4457e806c65b07e0254eb@XCH15-06-08.nw.nos.boeing.com> <D7681721-DACA-4C70-BCF0-ED7D2332EE2A@jisc.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <D7681721-DACA-4C70-BCF0-ED7D2332EE2A@jisc.ac.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [137.136.248.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/9O4VFT_iC2mZ9CP5CuRpccNWLD8>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:46:28 -0000

Tim,

Consider also as a second example that RFC4861, section 3.1 gives
a "Comparison with IPv4", including citations of RFC826 and other
relevant IPv4 RFCs.

Whereas RFC8200 and RFC4861 have multiple paragraphs, however,
I think rfc6434(bis) can make do with s single sentence near the
beginning as for RFC8200.

Thanks - Fred

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Chown [mailto:Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk]
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 4:32 PM
> To: Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> Cc: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>du>; 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: Updates to RFC6434
> 
> Hi Fred,
> 
> We can add this topic to the list of things to be raised in the Singapore meeting.
> 
> If anyone else has strong view on this, please do shout now though.
> 
> Tim
> 
> > On 30 Oct 2017, at 20:46, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tim,
> >
> > I believe it should be cited in the introduction in the same way as
> > RFC8200 cites RFC791.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Tim Chown [mailto:Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk]
> >> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 1:28 PM
> >> To: Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> >> Cc: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>du>; 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
> >> Subject: Re: Updates to RFC6434
> >>
> >> That was a ‘could’; I think we subsequently agreed it wasn’t necessary, for the reason Tim mentioned?
> >>
> >> Tim
> >>
> >>> On 30 Oct 2017, at 20:06, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Tim,
> >>>
> >>> I am referring to Tim Chown’s proposed resolution to my original comment:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg28394.html
> >>>
> >>> Tim’s proposal was to cite RFC1122 in the intro, which I agree would be
> >>> appropriate.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks - Fred
> >>>
> >>> From: Timothy Winters [mailto:twinters@iol.unh.edu]
> >>> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 12:46 PM
> >>> To: Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> >>> Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
> >>> Subject: Re: Updates to RFC6434
> >>>
> >>> Hi Fred,
> >>>
> >>> I thought we decided we didn't want to point to the historic IPv4 text in that.  Can you remind me were you wanted that text?
> >>>
> >>> ~Tim
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Templin, Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >>> We talked about adding an informative reference to RFC1122. Can
> >>> you please add that?
> >>>
> >>> Fred
> >>>
> >>> From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Timothy Winters
> >>> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 6:43 AM
> >>> To: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
> >>> Subject: Updates to RFC6434
> >>>
> >>> We have posted an updated version of 6434bis, with the following changes since Prague:
> >>> 	• Text on EH processing
> >>> 	• Noted that RFC4191 is a MUST, but a SHOULD for Type C node
> >>> 	• Updated RFC references (8200, 8201, 8221, 8247)
> >>> 	• Added note on RFC 7772 for power consumption
> >>> 	• Added ‘Why /64?’ reference; RFC 7421
> >>> 	• Removed jumbogram text
> >>> 	• Added reference to draft-ietf-v6ops-unique-ipv6-prefix-per-host
> >>> 	• For 3GPP, added ‘snapshot’ comment on RFC7066
> >>> 	• Added RFC8028 as a SHOULD (for Section 5.5 from RFC 6724)
> >>> 	• Removed ATM over IPv6
> >>> 	• Added reference to RFC8064
> >>> 	• Added MUST for BCP 198, and ref to draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6rtr-reqs
> >>> 	• Added text on avoiding 1280 MTU for UDP (inc. DNS) traffic
> >>> We'll be sending some additional questions to the list later this week to hopefully get this document ready for working group last
> >> call.
> >>>
> >>> ~Tim, Tim and John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>> From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
> >>> Date: Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 9:36 AM
> >>> Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-02.txt
> >>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> >>> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> >>> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Maintenance WG of the IETF.
> >>>
> >>>        Title           : IPv6 Node Requirements
> >>>        Authors         : Tim Chown
> >>>                          John Loughney
> >>>                          Timothy Winters
> >>>        Filename        : draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-02.txt
> >>>        Pages           : 40
> >>>        Date            : 2017-10-30
> >>>
> >>> Abstract:
> >>>   This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes.  It is expected
> >>>   that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations.
> >>>   Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function
> >>>   well and interoperate in a large number of situations and
> >>>   deployments.
> >>>
> >>>   This document obsoletes RFC 6434, and in turn RFC 4294.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis/
> >>>
> >>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-02
> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-02
> >>>
> >>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> >>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-02
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> >>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >>>
> >>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> >>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >>> ipv6@ietf.org
> >>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Now offering testing for SDN applications and controllers in our SDN switch test bed. Learn more today http://bit.ly/SDN_IOLPR
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Now offering testing for SDN applications and controllers in our SDN switch test bed. Learn more today http://bit.ly/SDN_IOLPR
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> >>> ipv6@ietf.org
> >>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >