IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Fri, 27 October 2017 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@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 7698813F5A2; Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:33:48 -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=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 DtVkOTTkB4QY; Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (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 421C113915C; Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id q83so9246972qke.6; Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:33:47 -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=sMDjKdq4d+1pnt0slB5wQJfJHKrxzH8Cxt9TdI79B2o=; b=Em3DPwqtNYnbu7UFtr+kVGqYKrZKzJIIW3U5Cf6JgegPj/iY3zZvWXVTbt/1In0BKa HlNlLPh7ZD1MWmkApBEM4j78WJ3HZ4H3/ClQANMswSzxVu5U1rCntNBJTqZRJ+v3cJoC vuasDl+DQJ3nZhLksF5qnIBavprKdOJhx9mB2CTw4xwKiwJnAYXMoExkHnFB9Uo7FoOi yECa7jkbanbBUMAzqVYFBTUJf28g3q5PPZs/SblAr2Ocwb8f8e/cUzWx/+msV6PjvzLk hZHBY5Be3woBy16yzBBSuxao4iptoLgG+F7ROHir4CDx+chCUpd4/yYLDyTsJPZdCsdY qG7Q==
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=sMDjKdq4d+1pnt0slB5wQJfJHKrxzH8Cxt9TdI79B2o=; b=V5gwplx8HQA1U1kXE7lFqQDN40aNUZrkvV7fo6oI2YJjhctwTvyYtDod94HW5zIZug YI3zlGbmszNB/R7GzF7VcAwHePiYr9e0d6sdXyxB6710zi4Fr195kQ0yUQjhbYvnn8eB a/dmMBG916RgI1j4srlaQD80JB2zqJ69m3xo9jWPGNtgrwRDxBDDuN6oGmAZyQoYyyqS SRydj82jpujWkZukk2Bxdojpw6xRafzQPDwhmGs7dLa3PFRZLq9/ePwM1vM/jWDf+NZ5 z5VaZVIZv3KP+6ihhRZDH4rP5IBcFAtVnJ0w4Op77LirRXdevCP7zLKgaAv7k9tD4abJ hdPQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaUiN+s8Jqx+56RHV17QIOl98zIpCEQreImM3f0r4yFGr2u01MZa EhZUaAG1Fqibnm4UjgfE8bBogU4nBnGHNnqK43PbcNhW
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+Sf66CMqpZrY3FcYC087V0d3xntoX1y2XCy/QcQWfBgBTAqn7CgiUGz9PdBJgjyf9JAG+pZsCh026hdyoDfjmE=
X-Received: by 10.55.115.130 with SMTP id o124mr1908844qkc.83.1509125626269; Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:33:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.237.61.137 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:33:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-cDT=8JhiJASu7zqZiG2aSBQ+uKb1uET=VBkeBOpTAvjQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <150888618658.4890.17540557977964477269.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F068A57-9F88-4951-A584-D103193744C4@gmail.com> <b16972d4-5456-76f5-0555-d94d9818d21c@nostrum.com> <494DB70A-D752-45A9-9D9F-B0062F2E2764@employees.org> <CAJE_bqdJZREuyUK9bvyK+N+-7Mc1xr-0Q+w5iFohoR=j4mZgNg@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-cDT=8JhiJASu7zqZiG2aSBQ+uKb1uET=VBkeBOpTAvjQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:33:45 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: LzJR8wz-Rn3L46im-LihNu1dP4M
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqdYjEaQZNXx2_Dkn+Sjm5kwCTQQq9+BXXF-K__msRyigQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Adam Roach's Discuss on draft-ietf-6man-maxra-03: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, draft-ietf-6man-maxra@ietf.org, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/kCBXM9UokHkV0dQT84CBAtAxHDs>
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 17:33:48 -0000

At Fri, 27 Oct 2017 12:03:29 -0500,
Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

> > If anything, if we now "clarify" it to mean "exclusive", at least one
> > implementation will now become technically non-compliant.  So, while
> > my primary suggestion is not to do anything about it, if we really
> > need to say something, I'd suggest clarifying "whether this 'between'
> > is inclusive or exclusive does not matter in terms interoperability
> > and is left to implementations".
>
> If the precise meaning of the boundaries set by a MUST requirement doesn't
> actually matter, I'm not understanding why this is a MUST ...  Adam can
> speak for himself, but that's what *I* would be confused about.

That's not my call either, and it's totally possible that an RFC2119
MUST was used too casually, but I guess the spirit of the MUST in this
case is to specify a sensible *range* with some stronger requirement
level so a deviant implementor or operator can't cause an extreme
effect.  But it's not important whether the exact boundary values are
included.  With this interpretation, this should read
AdvDefaultLifetime MUST be one of the following:
[lower, upper]
(lower, upper)
[lower, upper)
(lower, upper]

What 'lower' and 'upper' are is important (hence the MUST), but which
one of the above four is implemented isn't.

That makes sense to me.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email