Re: [ipwave] 118

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Wed, 17 April 2019 07:46 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 520E8120332; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 00:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.633
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.633 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] 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 7y-y04QS0Oax; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 00:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (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 9C28A120321; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 00:46:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id x3H7kVur095521; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:46:31 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C75E201BF5; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:46:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8F2200C2C; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:46:31 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id x3H7kU97004371; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:46:31 +0200
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 神明達 哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Cc: Pascal Thubert <pthubert@cisco.com>, "<int-dir@ietf.org>" <int-dir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb.all@ietf.org, its@ietf.org, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <155169869045.5118.3508360720339540639@ietfa.amsl.com> <bcb6d12d-5b21-1f10-1afe-221321f8e7a6@gmail.com> <CAJE_bqd5t77B5ij3ot-F-ucx5+3A7LATC-VTBx3w2_kCDD8fNA@mail.gmail.com> <96574d8b-c5f4-c641-4a79-47974a18d87e@gmail.com> <b2459889-f8d6-43c0-acc2-2ffe00fb1985@gmail.com> <26900f46-88da-cf3e-9ae0-b23e056ee840@gmail.com> <ad32743d-981a-0ae7-a6ca-f7a4e9841831@gmail.com> <ece445c6-d599-152c-80aa-670495cbb64d@gmail.com> <CAJE_bqdVqPT761+59TOPHXnr5RqtjNk6WAA81_jZAogGqpJX2A@mail.gmail.com> <350c5cf2-b338-047d-e99b-db6d6a4f6574@gmail.com>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4b717f2c-e8b3-8a47-96d4-67901a98c15f@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:46:30 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <350c5cf2-b338-047d-e99b-db6d6a4f6574@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/vosafFd-ihYHMg01w5mASiLHwwQ>
Subject: Re: [ipwave] 118
X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPWAVE - IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments WG at IETF <its.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/its>, <mailto:its-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/its/>
List-Post: <mailto:its@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:its-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its>, <mailto:its-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:46:40 -0000


Le 16/04/2019 à 22:48, Brian E Carpenter a écrit :
> On 17-Apr-19 04:30, 神明達哉 wrote:
>> At Tue, 16 Apr 2019 12:58:01 +0200,
>> Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Not quite, because it also says
>>>>
>>>> "  An Interface ID SHOULD be of length
>>>>       64 decimal for all types of IPv6 addresses.  In the particular case
>>>>       of IPv6 link-local addresses, the length of the Interface ID MAY be
>>>>       118 decimal."
>>>>
>>>> which conflicts with RFC4291.
>>>
>>> True.  I forgot that 118.  Thank you for pointing to it.
>>>
>>> Remark, it says MAY, not MUST.
>>>
>>> Do you stronly disagree with 118?  I can remove the phrase containing
>>> it, if so.  I can also remove the entire cited text altogether, such
>>> that to be silent about the length of the Interface ID.
>>
>> (Speaking for myself who just happenned to notice it - I overlooked this
>> 118, too).  I'd say it's more consistent with the removal of "fe80::/10"
>> if we simply remove "In the particular case of IPv6 link-local
>> addresses..." sentence.  If it really has to stay here, it will
>> inevitably need to be an update to RFC4291 and need to pass that high
>> bar (quite likely delaying the publication substantially, if not
>> making it fail).  Unless that's absolutely necessary for this protocol
>> specification, it's much safer not to discuss that in this document.
> 
> Agreed.

I propose the following:
OLD:
> 	  A randomized Interface ID has the same characteristics of a
> 	  randomized MAC address, except the length in bits.  A MAC
> 	  address SHOULD be of length 48 decimal.  An Interface ID
> 	  SHOULD be of length 64 decimal for all types of IPv6
> 	  addresses.  In the particular case of IPv6 link-local
> 	  addresses, the length of the Interface ID MAY be 118
> 	  decimal.

NEW:
> 	  A randomized Interface ID has the same characteristics of a
> 	  randomized MAC address, except the length in bits.  A MAC
> 	  address SHOULD be of length 48 decimal.  An Interface ID
> 	  SHOULD be of length specified in other documents.

Do you disagree?

Alex


> 
>      Brian
> 
>