IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pppext] small draft to update iana rules in PPP BAP/BACP

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Sat, 05 September 2009 09:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: pppext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pppext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C6A3A6820 for <pppext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 02:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.683
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.683 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sdgAbY+hNtqp for <pppext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 02:41:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E886B3A67FE for <pppext@ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 02:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70CFAD6270; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:41:57 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GBNxqLjpO9TF; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:41:56 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0B60D6246; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:41:56 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <4AA23263.20907@piuha.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 12:41:55 +0300
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ignacio Goyret <igoyret@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <4A9F722B.6070508@piuha.net> <200909040106.n8416H60007097@cliff.eng.ascend.com>
In-Reply-To: <200909040106.n8416H60007097@cliff.eng.ascend.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: pppext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pppext] small draft to update iana rules in PPP BAP/BACP
X-BeenThere: pppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: PPP Extensions <pppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pppext>
List-Post: <mailto:pppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2009 09:41:37 -0000

Ignacio,

Thanks for your review:

> Just a couple of minor comments on the "PPP BAP Link Type" option.
> It may be useful to IANA to mention that this is actually
> a bit field and that each entry defines one bit.
>   

Yes -- I changed this in my copy of the draft.

> Although RFC2125 allows defining more bits for this field,
> the interoperability of such a choice would probably be questionable.
> May be the text should include some sort of discouragement to
> adding more bits beyond the defined ones.
>
> Finally, the bit positions are opposite of the usual: bit 0 is
> actually the low order bit. This is very confusing, but this is
> also how it is in the original RFC. Too bad it wasn't fixed
> back then.
>   

Sounds reasonable. I have made some changes to make these clearer.

Jari

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email