Re: draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-06.txt and affect on RFC3542

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Wed, 06 April 2005 01:07 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA07671 for <ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Apr 2005 21:07:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DIz9K-0006fk-JR for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:16:06 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DIyyX-0000CH-Km; Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:04:57 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DIyyU-0000C9-RF for ipv6@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:04:55 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA07342 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Apr 2005 21:04:52 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DIz6i-0006Yi-AD for ipv6@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:13:26 -0400
Received: from d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.107]) by e32.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j3614g5j660560 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Apr 2005 21:04:42 -0400
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j3614grg192714 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Apr 2005 19:04:42 -0600
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3614gIM028821 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Apr 2005 19:04:42 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-49-158-172.mts.ibm.com [9.49.158.172]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3614fHg028804; Tue, 5 Apr 2005 19:04:42 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.12.5) with ESMTP id j3614Bau005456; Tue, 5 Apr 2005 21:04:12 -0400
Message-Id: <200504060104.j3614Bau005456@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: Message from JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> of "Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:52:43 +0900." <y7vfyy7i77o.wl@ocean.jinmei.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:04:11 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d
Cc: Kristine Adamson <adamson@us.ibm.com>, ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-06.txt and affect on RFC3542
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IP Version 6 Working Group \(ipv6\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17

JINMEI Tatuya / =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCP0BMQEMjOkgbKEI=?=
	<jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> writes:

> >>>>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 06:13:22 -0700, 
> >>>>> Kristine Adamson <adamson@us.ibm.com> said:

> > Thanks for the responses.  But if RFC3542 is not updated, won't this 
> > adversely affect the portability of applications that references these new 
> > codes?

> Yes, it will.  However, the point is whether the portability issue is
> serious enough to require a revision of RFC3542.  Different people may
> have different opinions on this, and I personally don't think it's big
> enough.

Suggestion:

1) Set up an issue tracker for this (and perhaps every IPv6 RFC for
   which there are some known errors/omissions?) that keeps track of
   these sorts of things. That way folk will be able to more easily
   find the list of outstanding issues (and their likely resolution),
   and we (the IETF community) won't lose track of them.

2) Although it may be overkill in this case, one could easily publish
   a (very!) short RFC just listing the additional code points, so
   that they are documened in the RFC series, and folk looking at the
   older RFC can find the new RFC via the "updated by" tag.

Thomas

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------