Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by
Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Thu, 07 September 2017 07:51 UTC
Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
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 D7F65132EC1 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 00:51:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 Maz1eQrcKc_3 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 00:51:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from accordion.employees.org (accordion.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E5EF132EBC for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 00:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from h.hanazo.no (96.51-175-103.customer.lyse.net [51.175.103.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by accordion.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B831F2D4F9E; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 07:51:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by h.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04B241030B683; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 09:51:00 +0200 (CEST)
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Message-Id: <FC201C5E-0ADA-405A-991F-B87667A38954@employees.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_43D3162E-810A-4F6E-8E63-3DAE3804A89B"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Subject: Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 09:50:59 +0200
In-Reply-To: <54FCEE43-5476-44FF-85CF-5073808F438F@employees.org>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1708100947130.2261@uplift.swm.pp.se> <8447.1502388439@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <a3ed97e2-e907-6a20-0d00-6de532784f0c@nostrum.com> <826ee900-0edf-2bb4-ed35-3824b6ad8bba@gmail.com> <2664CA78-2291-46C7-ACF9-460AA3A51706@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1708110743410.2261@uplift.swm.pp.se> <52cae497-9539-3ba3-70b7-0bb55317f986@gmail.com> <12017.1502561028@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708130754510.3655@uplift.swm.pp.se> <8318F69E-BD7C-404F-9420-0FEA1340936E@employees.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708151234491.3655@uplift.swm.pp.se> <4864.1502919481@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <338FC806-C696-44ED-A0C5-4B0B9D1A6F84@tzi.org> <7409.1502937298@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <68BB141F-6E66-491F-9FDB-D67709585C2F@employees.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709062152360.29378@uplift.swm.pp.se> <54FCEE43-5476-44FF-85CF-5073808F438F@employees.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/ZvfmgFYeAdphWsigfNcB6U5rx0E>
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: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 07:51:11 -0000
> Oh well, let's write a short document creating the new registry then... Done. A new version of I-D, draft-troan-6man-ndpioiana-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Ole Troan and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-troan-6man-ndpioiana Revision: 00 Title: IPv6 ND PIO Flags IANA considerations Document date: 2017-09-07 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 4 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-troan-6man-ndpioiana-00.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-troan-6man-ndpioiana/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-6man-ndpioiana-00 Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-troan-6man-ndpioiana-00 Abstract: The Prefix Information Option in the IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Router Advertisement defines an 8-bit flag field with two flags defined and the remaining 6 bits reservered (Reserved1). RFC 6275 has defined a new flag from this field without creating a IANA registry or updating RFC 4861. The purpose of this document is to request IANA to create a new registry for the PIO flags to avoid potential conflict in the use of these flags. 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. The IETF Secretariat Ole
- RFC 4861 missing updated-by (was: [Editorial Erra… Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by (was: [Editorial … Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Robert Sparks
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by (was: [Editorial … Toerless Eckert
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Toerless Eckert
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Brian E Carpenter
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Suresh Krishnan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Brian E Carpenter
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Brian E Carpenter
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Joel M. Halpern
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Brian E Carpenter
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mark Andrews
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Suresh Krishnan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Sander Steffann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Sander Steffann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Philip Homburg
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Sander Steffann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Sander Steffann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Sander Steffann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Sander Steffann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Timothy Winters
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mark Andrews
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Carsten Bormann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by David Farmer
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Brian E Carpenter
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Carsten Bormann
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Michael Richardson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Ole Troan
- Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by Mikael Abrahamsson