IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pim] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-extension-06: (with COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 01 February 2022 18:57 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1FA63A1A2F; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 10:57:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 7sT1wZ5rJtkY; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 10:57:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52d.google.com (mail-ed1-x52d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52d]) (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 EB53F3A1B92; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 10:57:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52d.google.com with SMTP id m11so36397135edi.13; Tue, 01 Feb 2022 10:57:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3o+ThdKoUJvPUgg0Hj0+scnF6PbWFiHvC9UyNWx1EPU=; b=ppuvHzFsjCjgD1u4Algf32AbiuGG5Ov5dff7d72QtwM7EVSDTuMryW3oK6NRvFrlLs GBXUiQbbf0Kpy+kTTDpMRV5DBg1fH8ArZyvGUWn4Es+4KOIrLJ8mBZIc6kqJ5OnrOPZi BDP7toxzgVoDdSBHymBK/Zar9AduHryRrQsACRIRA8787S/4ePRr59s19/zgcc0U9g+p 6F23P/rb9NN4g9r9cfyZQH8aU39TewZ78OsMnbEs2k2ibFR1wXNMgfbcSsks+X+Odanw Kj+Snw57qbDfGl+1f23d27rWcygNewV3Upjb231Ei0lCGyY8fnnmVs1DoqxsGUpvRCK5 kHlA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3o+ThdKoUJvPUgg0Hj0+scnF6PbWFiHvC9UyNWx1EPU=; b=pPM6B3uCIsPoL1DeEzdR3x9Npf4KywUg+YdPKNbUlbWWDPDFlT3ymN85q7UCS7goWY 9jANmenhrsfzvqowZvqydZ4lQM8B8JZoUrTU2JDxVi7mHhrGmL/4JPmYL0wc9YBTjKo5 m+jfz7nwOalRQ4sEOO+LxtrfK13VG/UXEySTI8dEnBaM7U17p/tapbthX2HZqMJTVCvo 4+wYYCnmAv36JSuFavut74BIacFIWxgIlV7uGZsc7hLrw6CDlFTaonECmPyFacltaiR9 DecUu1vNtG12VY6gN+7EVwWnEyakSzI692rX0RdL4DkjZcn+OEAZDGCg4tTmvl2Yh0KV LjOA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532kYzMG+Y8HzTXGjwCyKHiSXDS3sQ+zGuCFP3Kzz4YE6Wxyqd7C lfjfNMsisgyEvmFblIz81YmD9c9QxsVoOO4H36g=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwEvut2ExusaUwQZ8IcG1awwo2FiPh+brI66cZxKPIPhi0jj7EsLX70+VQwLTAPkhZKGUqnKj0W9qFXpsBlfOA=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:11cd:: with SMTP id j13mr17831573edw.116.1643741819112; Tue, 01 Feb 2022 10:56:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 1 Feb 2022 10:56:58 -0800
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <164364051519.21164.246935898257729898@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <164364051519.21164.246935898257729898@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2022 10:56:58 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMMESswHR8qnMgC7ktG8rDDbp=P+=v_CKmz+S9vFcp7eAeq7iQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Éric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com>
Cc: pim-chairs@ietf.org, mmcbride7@gmail.com, draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-extension@ietf.org, pim@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/C5_ot0bew5eMr7eCEvP4Kz5rW6c>
Subject: Re: [pim] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-igmp-mld-extension-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: pim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Protocol Independent Multicast <pim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pim/>
List-Post: <mailto:pim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim>, <mailto:pim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2022 18:57:04 -0000

On January 31, 2022 at 9:48:36 AM, Éric Vyncke wrote:


Eric:

Hi!

Just answering your questions about §3.1.

...
> ## Section 3.1
>
> I was about to raise a DISCUSS on this issue. It appears that the E-bit is
> specified in this document while it was defined as reserved in MLDv2 RFC 3810,
> i.e., should this document formally update RFC 3810 (and possibly IGMPv3 as
> well)? I.e., in the header + abstract + introduction ?

The WG had a specific discussion about formally Updating
rfc3376/rfc3810 and decided against it.  In general, the consensus is
that this new mechanism is not a required extension of IGMPv3/MPDv2.
Among other reasons, as explained in §5, host implementations change
very slowly, and the use of the E-bit is backward compatible.


> Also, does this mean that once the E-bit is set, then there cannot be any
> other extensions except TLVs ? This seems a limiting factor.

IMHO, TLVs are pretty flexible. :-)

If someone wanted to create a new non-TLV extension, they could add an
extra bit and use it (and the E-bit) to indicate its presence.  I'm
sure there are other wats around it.


Thanks for the review!

Alvaro.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email