IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] One comment to draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-05.txt

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Thu, 02 February 2017 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48793129538 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:10:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 bwlTgvM_ngvZ for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:10:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x236.google.com (mail-pg0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::236]) (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 0C0BB129519 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:10:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x236.google.com with SMTP id v184so185131pgv.3 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 11:10:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DV80LszUsNii7MBtqp0Zdyop34ge7spuWOZrkJqbvkA=; b=gsQg2OrQzerVePmuZ6JRxDiOYnNaUQLKnQ1NYY8z6V2Yy9Klj+zY4MT01V7LR6uJFA umQZ1hANSUQrQuNlFhI+SZxpzLGyIJFMFeYQVVFk5XD+WyJ632m1ACKpb+AZxv2Sfrab WYoo+cdQIhE8X42Jd6q1XzviLB+bYDp2gx3YkBZN9U9jPFUvkRVyKS4Pxo1A3KZYwF4c eXMv/68IVu3KzZGf4WLruk/jFOWIf3S3dXsMl9ZZR6EeN2KHMuTQpwupNvCjWOwXoggx R9VTTON61PsSLVmBWz669Q7NKiS0Wu+g0HKyk2SxQE35eToJEfo0rOVIi52PifizYH78 ghWg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DV80LszUsNii7MBtqp0Zdyop34ge7spuWOZrkJqbvkA=; b=OuEbdsXkRUF6sX03s2hAnTv0Mc82XW4z11kBL5XwQYjfWA+A1w4zvH1JX5biqZWqOj kgXY2lpML6jt+hKPSMd5UO5O2HJ/83ixs1kEGXEwAL5p4izNdCtCJJFUoSgOsFkfeeuC L0fAaSZ6C5+/hhBLJUMfxbOtMDBh08GLOABh7qhdy2Wgx2wzIuIiS3bY7n6OZJGGPqPc dej3LER5pNd2theqGok6X9GqtcQ1+roSJMsSAf8+2oIz+w0tEePAg3oayw6W1i355c3e 8EUXyhDztlG0btIAdqBA3GYQMPZjPAxXSOaxv0f/Auw+5Tdqn/39+TDvUhUlq7qCqlio ih1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKVRIcaDB9QlWjA/64csBLejzQRB4AxXElZFSy2ePeFailNidTsI6yfwoAEkzjT7Q==
X-Received: by 10.99.1.87 with SMTP id 84mr12488231pgb.142.1486062621604; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 11:10:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.197.31.157] (173-11-119-245-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.11.119.245]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u75sm61050394pgc.31.2017.02.02.11.10.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Feb 2017 11:10:20 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <3f4af018-7016-0539-50c9-f7d467f0230d@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 11:10:20 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <76EFBC70-58F0-4D76-AFD4-89B87828C8C0@gmail.com>
References: <mailman.3778.1486059811.4842.i-d-announce@ietf.org> <E29F9348-438C-4551-B383-ECE62118C585@gmail.com> <8a09a5a2-b252-1d25-cb26-a04be2b9b824@joelhalpern.com> <6C4A0552-F74C-4BE7-886D-F8C09B3A098E@gmail.com> <3f4af018-7016-0539-50c9-f7d467f0230d@joelhalpern.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/hpAgVeKr-7-if3PfWN3k8rjYduQ>
Cc: LISP mailing list list <lisp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lisp] One comment to draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-05.txt
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 19:10:23 -0000

I guess it did. But should it have a normative reference to RFC6830 where type=15 is not documented?

Dino

> On Feb 2, 2017, at 11:06 AM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
> 
> Ithink we need to take care with the wording so that we do not introuce a normative dependence on 6833bis.  The wording I saw in your email looked like it would produce such a dependence.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 2/2/17 1:58 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
>> Did we? Why can’t it all be independent?
>> 
>> Dino
>> 
>>> On Feb 2, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I had not realized we intended to defer creation of the registry until we publish 6833bis.
>>> 
>>> Yours,
>>> Joel
>>> 
>>> On 2/2/17 1:26 PM, Dino Farinacci wrote:
>>>> Mohamed, the statement “This document updates RFC6830.” is too broad and
>>>> easily open to misinterpretation. See my suggestion below.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I suggest this wording (and possibly not in the abstract):
>>>> 
>>>> This document introduces a new LISP message type so extenstions to the
>>>> protocol may be experimented with. The code point is defined in
>>>> RFC6833bis in which this document references as well as describes how
>>>> the sub-types for the code point are used.
>>>> 
>>>> Dino
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> lisp mailing list
>>>> lisp@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>>>> 
>> 
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email