IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: AD evaluation: draft-ietf-6man-rfc1981bis-03

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Thu, 26 January 2017 22:32 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.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 24EAC129BFE; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:32:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 2S-os8R05U8F; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:32:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it0-x22c.google.com (mail-it0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22c]) (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 699A7129BFC; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:32:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id r185so44328610ita.0; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:32:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=ct9qS1o+3YBWw7j/nsy0d2Lf3dfO8Yz0Rx/VQUA8nL0=; b=sCVvSsVzwXzw7fYGHhpu4uYbrf1HEqT18Y674hRHVVWmlaXULbbugjeLYimrHnm+Jy o/pxlLLHW65jRBEnNsDA433Aj1J3pNGLHSgr12J/9K8RHR/eE/wfl5MpW/VK8ZjVLMc3 r/8hq4R0zlhIPSaYHCNgvGLktZXAqEzPXJkeenwEudIGzf3bm8eviLX33dcudjIngEbK XaQzfFWKEEiXN48vaaP60I+hFDXeKEyFhTb0kMiG8qqJuP3cAIDP1zmIX9pHQTO0ZzD4 bXov7ltD6pejDdo/cDNQpftmoDATdg8xLDaG5HZs9a8wxJotKyPm4UmCUX9QtOwlZwip riWw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=ct9qS1o+3YBWw7j/nsy0d2Lf3dfO8Yz0Rx/VQUA8nL0=; b=bAw/d3wM7QxjMryA8rMzwZnPzPrHgto3OhT0LGoI8Yk6poBaQASgcrave331V1jrYR t6bTF5botSxMVx9k0f4hBiVzreHda5O5TkX8yGSdD2FAOBrCkEfg68fx3njB6+EA9aVZ ulJGjgZc8d62iZRNb6xovygfnTNigqCdsn1iVvebzfjXkrCpIansxYNzQaXMMPbNhGBb j+oAYl1v363iRWUaLx+el/90Kt0x2zs3XSQLBw9NZcUB7i3IINB1sZy4KyUid/jD8/mO jHhUyT8pupaxATFhqtU+bCV2JBq1pWd3pmUo6gVbgT+XDA9CfpGYgN2P/1caVWPZnu+n OxJg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLXuAr3VRJslaLln60FIsVSWEf71Enmo5+wbgyjMP2pLJBHAKCA+aWZr+SCsQ5FkQ==
X-Received: by 10.36.62.133 with SMTP id s127mr801885its.110.1485469937722; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:32:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.224.219] ([209.97.127.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g78sm2130436ioi.41.2017.01.26.14.32.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:32:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <A3106CB4-7934-4F98-9DAE-A4C567B6EFE8@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CC072157-FA92-467C-A054-6BFCCC874B1B"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: AD evaluation: draft-ietf-6man-rfc1981bis-03
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:32:15 -0800
In-Reply-To: <AA4F737C-F8CF-4741-A5ED-73999AA9B488@ericsson.com>
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
References: <6BBA4B27-FE19-405C-A165-9973A8E9AE68@ericsson.com> <CDD93C29-8900-4D0E-83F6-5BC50B3C5C98@gmail.com> <AA4F737C-F8CF-4741-A5ED-73999AA9B488@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/OJwIjP85v9A-hEXB5SwM5e0SVrg>
Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, "draft-ietf-6man-rfc1981bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-rfc1981bis.all@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 22:32:20 -0000

Suresh,

> On Jan 26, 2017, at 2:21 PM, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Bob,
>   Removing things we agreed on. One thought inline.
> 
>> On Jan 26, 2017, at 3:33 PM, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> 
>>> * Section 3
>>> 
>>> I am not sure why the following text is required. What are these nodes? I thought we discussed this and decided to not put in such text.
>>> 
>>> "(regardless of whether it decrements the Hop Limit)"
>>> 
>>> I would suggest removing the text or adding an example of such a node.
>> 
>> 
>> I went back and read the email thread:
>> 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?qdr=a&email_list=ipv6&q=text%3A(regardless+of+whether+it+decrements+the+Hop+Limit)&as=1&so=date
>> 
>> The discussion does go back and forth, but ends with Ole closing the issue in the tracker:
>> 
>>   #13: Regardless of whether it decrements the Hop Limit
>> 
>>   Changes (by otroan@employees.org):
>> 
>>     * status:  new => closed
>>     * resolution:   => wontfix
>> 
>> I interpert it to leave it in.  I don’t have a strong view on this, happy to remove it.  Any objections?
> 
> Not from me. But my read of the thread was that Ole was also questioning the value of the text. If the only case this covers is an ND proxy, I think the case is adequately handled by Section 4.1.1. of RFC4389.

OK, I will remove it.

Bob


> 
> Thanks
> Suresh
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email