IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Fri, 31 March 2017 17:56 UTC

Return-Path: <rraszuk@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 CB143129568; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=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 BGkheQfMFoED; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22f.google.com (mail-io0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]) (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 74E0E126D74; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:56:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id z13so44480616iof.2; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:56:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=fzKR1e2OsCNy4Ek48qoBUx9x52XLH44zrToeEo6mpbg=; b=Px2BJ/b/v0NJUvPEavbgQrbQ1qyAno9Ym8t2ucQKleKCcN+09k3hyaE4LhDPXnwx1A nT9daFow9q83+JahLYZBBfXPB3aKGWLP1BVMvB7Gj7358bhuBVYMqJl8hQiFJojHRaPH TOkwabAo+sUompJawmFrP8/7MiHRMedxDysEPRlhsuNsFiP0pKfEfLlkyTXGZv1jl/2z ytY3UyMLp8OMoPkvwHi/yxeo2KK3jtigYi6ykbp5Daw7sRzIT5OUOr3aePUKvAgYB5B8 r8lDx+bdJkjafn3tUiIRjfI6KfdiojLm3HDU4mufrYbK051V7IJu4NXB7yuldA5iFDhk M6lw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fzKR1e2OsCNy4Ek48qoBUx9x52XLH44zrToeEo6mpbg=; b=Ax5vudfZnbtzjAZA3f+vL0Ij4GDfxC0AZ+nqa4BArdx3jGGTpfB4/ud96Krhj4snD5 1DCqNEOBfH9e/ge2aFKwH4vQFehTcLW2KYfmQmTAfUd8C7pZYJgOscM+uvDRD08o16wn rYWZu2th2lEXpaLDRjP5wDNDtR9wDeAAwlss9fBkbxOOuvIcT6n9xot2YZHpXqspagpu iDqRASj3nfBye85SotsZ8DZjQeutTpEPze0CgbiG8pmJRIfzHxfjqKBFmIn8cjeKbeou bm9yauhx6xrLPkjeiVm90YHr252KmEUPhdoXThDY95QUf6fZxC4YXcYf/xaZjM+cABDa HItg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3ROiZZt0ut4zf9gYF08gcAx7MGqzGvG0purrjzlGJkTmpYF05KkmnVqLvIKWTlKvvkQtihLwNu4RMkfw==
X-Received: by 10.107.10.21 with SMTP id u21mr5001960ioi.139.1490982985839; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:56:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rraszuk@gmail.com
Received: by 10.79.90.71 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.79.90.71 with HTTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <3A7C2C05-8513-4248-82F3-15CC9C75B69E@ericsson.com>
References: <599257D7-532D-4512-929B-D124623EAF35@ericsson.com> <6B662F87-B0E6-4613-B406-8A22CA95DFA5@cisco.com> <4917F161-2EC8-43E0-AF4C-BFAEE44A492C@cable.comcast.com> <198e3116-5448-2fdf-4da7-4811a0133f05@gmail.com> <50E4A84C-F0ED-45ED-AA89-5713CBD8F9E0@gmail.com> <5aebc8ed-f873-94e9-1ae4-dab7b3a8ebef@gmail.com> <CA+b+ERk8kHWyBY3GPp21-pgrL_SsShaLkrn4UdecFeQPYamSEg@mail.gmail.com> <A0F19A98-7DBE-4616-B949-529ED2A81D62@ericsson.com> <CA+b+ERk_cKGB6a0SQd560cMiOzT4KbSic6fCCwQWrhNkNEcO3Q@mail.gmail.com> <76ABEAE0-6A89-4C69-82ED-968F949A3B19@employees.org> <CA+b+ERmqpRuw0z4ZQkhNYfEqGvqEJKYwM0hkuWg8dZrYXT4DdQ@mail.gmail.com> <FCFFDDCF-7A53-41E2-B414-53E568C92B35@employees.org> <CA+b+ERmELF1p_5vX_nqhB58Bm8c34N6=kkijuCRYkfkQcfKneQ@mail.gmail.com> <0ae6ba21-0529-e9ca-ab74-b18a85acad4a@gmail.com> <CA+b+ERm7vO-ZpSHKLvY+BfgWpMa7+abKR6BFnXkgUuUPEXYVEg@mail.gmail.com> <6C78BE2C-58B6-4A3A-B42A-C8A46D68B730@ericsson.com> <CA+b+ERk4mbHrTZi3JFKBh4RjUzN=SVUGONvFuEA5Ed178MzZmA@mail.gmail.com> <3A7C2C05-8513-4248-82F3-15CC9C75B69E@ericsson.com>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 12:56:24 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: otEm0LLn0BekkjZ_rRWP5Pu6ZoI
Message-ID: <CA+b+ERmchYvF9uexQZ-j752OPrtzr_TQgyDov7q01EvYe1ByWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IETF Last Call conclusion for draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
Cc: "Leddy, John" <John_Leddy@comcast.com>, otroan@employees.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis.all@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113ed7663cbc4f054c0a8752"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ZBxaMt6VVzyWKXiYOcZHkV9Zj9k>
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: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 17:56:29 -0000

Even if we treat encapsulation in new IPv6 header as only an option ?

Thx
R.



On Mar 31, 2017 12:46, "Suresh Krishnan" <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> On Mar 31, 2017, at 12:01 PM, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Suresh,
>
> As you requested one of many quotes from the draft which your
> clarification to 2460bis directly contradicts with:
>
> This include either:
>
>       A host originating an IPv6 packet.
>
>       *An SR domain ingress router encapsulating a received IPv6 packet
>       into an outer IPv6 header followed by an SRH.*
>
>
> Excellent. Thanks for pointing out the exact text. I can confirm that this
> text  *is compliant* with the RFC2460bis text.
>
> Thanks
> Suresh
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email