IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-maxra-03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Fri, 27 October 2017 00:30 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 8643113F417; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:30:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.88
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.88 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] 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 dSTH-v8IhjqX; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:30:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 2952313B1A9; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:30:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Orochi.local (99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v9R0UKdx028262 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:30:21 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-146-228.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.146.228] claimed to be Orochi.local
Subject: Re: Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-maxra-03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-6man-maxra@ietf.org, Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>
References: <150888618658.4890.17540557977964477269.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F068A57-9F88-4951-A584-D103193744C4@gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <b16972d4-5456-76f5-0555-d94d9818d21c@nostrum.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:30:15 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4F068A57-9F88-4951-A584-D103193744C4@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/e5_ZDDe8fOe14gSn7irezGsoXqA>
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, 27 Oct 2017 00:30:25 -0000

On 10/26/17 17:21, Bob Hinden wrote:
> I am not aware of interoperability problems caused by the RC4681 
> “between” language. Can you point to a problem?

Rather than running the risk of getting caught up on the minutiae of any 
scenario I might describe, I'm going to narrow my DISCUSS to a much 
simpler assertion:

Lacking a formal definition of "between," the following normative 
statement is ambiguous: "AdvDefaultLifetime MUST either be zero (the 
router is not to be used as a default router) or be a value between 
MaxRtrAdvInterval and 65535."

Normative statements cannot be ambiguous.

Please clarify whether this is an inclusive "between" or an exclusive 
"between."

/a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email