Re: comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-00.txt

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Mon, 03 November 2003 13:17 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA00732 for <ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:17:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGeZx-0004RZ-4B for ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:17:11 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hA3DH9MC017075 for ipv6-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:17:09 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGeZw-0004RK-TV for ipv6-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:17:08 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA00701 for <ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:16:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGeZv-0005LR-00 for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:17:08 -0500
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGeZv-0005LO-00 for ipv6-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:17:07 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGeZq-0004Nh-3k; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:17:02 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AGeZL-0004MC-PY for ipv6@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:16:31 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA00667 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:16:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGeZK-0005Kt-00 for ipv6@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:16:30 -0500
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com ([206.197.161.140]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AGeZJ-0005KG-00 for ipv6@ietf.org; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:16:30 -0500
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach.fuaim.com [206.197.161.141]) by uillean.fuaim.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hA3DFwV17874; Mon, 3 Nov 2003 05:15:58 -0800
Received: from innovationslab.net (md-wmnsmd-cuda2-c6a-a-4.chvlva.adelphia.net [68.65.120.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by clairseach.fuaim.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id hA3DJ7tX002049 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Nov 2003 05:19:10 -0800
Message-ID: <3FA654D1.4070509@innovationslab.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:14:57 -0500
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de
CC: "JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H" <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>, ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-00.txt
References: <20031028144912.GA2088@iu-bremen.de> <y7vvfq20xfo.wl@ocean.jinmei.org> <20031103130028.GA2238@iu-bremen.de>
In-Reply-To: <20031103130028.GA2238@iu-bremen.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ipv6-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: IP Version 6 Working Group (ipv6) <ipv6.ietf.org>
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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I agree with Juergen's suggestion as well.  The scoped addr arch
should mandate the use of 0 as the default zone ID.

Brian

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 03:37:47PM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H wrote:
> 
>>>   I am not sure why this is helpful. Is there a particular reason why
>>>   we can not just say that the default zone is indicated by a zone
>>>   index which MUST (or SHOULD if we have to compromise) be zero?
>>
>>Hmm, from a quick re-read of the draft, I don't see a particular
>>reason for not using a stronger word.  Perhaps the intention was the
>>choice is purely local to the node.  Even so, if using a specific
>>requirement helps the MIB work, I think it is reasonable to use a
>>strong word.  So, could you tell me the MIB document that can be
>>clearer if we use MUST or SHOULD to specify the default zone ID?
> 
> 
> The document in question is <draft-ietf-ops-rfc3291bis-01.txt> and
> it says in several places that 0 refers to the default zone. It would
> be nice if the scoping architecture could actually back this up by at
> least saying the default zone SHOULD be identified by the zone index 0.
> 
> /js
> 


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