IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Thu, 07 September 2017 08:00 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
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 5483E132EC7 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 01:00:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 buP-c3V49Npl for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 01:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D320132339 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 01:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7F09CB1; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 10:00:17 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1504771217; bh=85RAwZrw3/BC5KWWQzCKeaSxXM8m917YuXUQsH49A8E=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=HM5gXf2DJG24g6Tn7iKFKTRNSYqfnmKsBrYjobHLJZzKtEwfysXbkEXb+gD5KaWtV 6A+FHcI/1nEibV5D8wDMT+GFQOL4pyFJrOvREd6u+8Y05NByXw7JLiuM3ZLmMmkCBX aPK/J83ax31gMoVVfezZYAAbe9HOBrnP3wtE8LzE=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C36FAF; Thu, 7 Sep 2017 10:00:17 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2017 10:00:17 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: RFC 4861 missing updated-by
In-Reply-To: <FC201C5E-0ADA-405A-991F-B87667A38954@employees.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709070959050.29378@uplift.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> <FC201C5E-0ADA-405A-991F-B87667A38954@employees.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/xX9nVzTyGxBsYtcU4SDrcwIhscQ>
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 08:00:25 -0000

On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Ole Troan wrote:

>> Oh well, let's write a short document creating the new registry then...
>
> Done.

Thanks! Exactly what I wanted. Now that we have a template, does anyone 
know of any other bit fields that are in the same situation?

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email