IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: AUTH48 changes to draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-09

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Thu, 20 December 2018 07:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 DA3FD131069; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 23:24:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 fglf5Dt8gzyx; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 23:24:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orange.com (mta136.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.70.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF774130DFB; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 23:24:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfednr03.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.67]) by opfednr23.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 43L3Dh6rdpz5wyF; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 08:24:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.75]) by opfednr03.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 43L3Dh62WmzDq7r; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 08:24:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::65de:2f08:41e6:ebbe%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Thu, 20 Dec 2018 08:24:52 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis@ietf.org>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: AUTH48 changes to draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-09
Thread-Topic: AUTH48 changes to draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-09
Thread-Index: AQHUmCw8Ygwa+yVL5keUJHGTRUqm26WHOOJg
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 07:24:51 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E05E0DA@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <8A9ACE0F-8EF7-48D7-AB1A-309D05A350CC@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8A9ACE0F-8EF7-48D7-AB1A-309D05A350CC@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/kN8rGVFbELOFHNWpKdNStsqTiUc>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 20 Dec 2018 07:24:57 -0000

Hi Suresh, 

These changes are reasonable. 

For the second one, I would add a pointer to Section 4 of 6980 which motivates the reco. 

Cheers,
Med 

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Suresh Krishnan
> Envoyé : jeudi 20 décembre 2018 07:21
> À : 6man WG
> Cc : draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis@ietf.org; 6man Chairs
> Objet : AUTH48 changes to draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-09
> 
> Hi all,
>   There are two proposed (non-editorial) changes to be made to draft-ietf-
> 6man-rfc6434-bis-09 during the AUTH48 period and I would like to check with
> the WG if anyone has objections to these changes. I personally think that
> these are reasonable changes to make.  If I do not hear any objections by end
> of day December 27th 2018 (AOE), I will approve these changes and send this
> along the RFC publication path.
> 
> Change 1) Text change in Section 5.4.
> 
> Old:
> Neighbor Discovery SHOULD be supported. RFC 4861 states:
> 
> New:
> Neighbor Discovery MUST be supported with the noted exceptions below.
> RFC 4861 states:
> 
> Change 2) New text in Section 5.4.
> 
> OLD:
> 
> <blank>
> 
> NEW:
> 
> As per RFC 6980, hosts MUST NOT employ IPv6 fragmentation for sending any of
> the following Neighbor Discovery and SEcure Neighbor Discovery messages:
> Neighbor Solicitation, Neighbor Advertisement, Router Solicitation, Router
> Advertisement, Redirect, or Certification Path Solicitation.
> 
> Thanks
> Suresh
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email