[Roll] a comment about unaware-leaves IANA section
Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 23 March 2021 10:11 UTC
Return-Path: <rahul.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BA913A0AB8 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 03:11:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 H9Zqsk89EF38 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 03:11:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x632.google.com (mail-ej1-x632.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::632]) (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 3F9963A0ABB for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 03:11:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x632.google.com with SMTP id u21so8146700ejo.13 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 03:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ev6CgCUN30SpHhU0OWNhe+TiKXgb1STF4WeTuk/kYaU=; b=lnvEsdNe2HyhsyEiImkVhFxf+uIKZBa7/f7AMk18mgYJev8V4w4HBI0Y7WtXFmTM5M 8ydqYpusip2XWue6iXU8cpXP7YLhzimIPRQi0xva4W2n2YcTtpwUEEMA5V1/b2qOqBlf SGDjTJGNEv7iSgQVZy9hdyRuvOl5y8gidVC/mXbCzpjMqQH7l8JcPBnA760DTPmQi6DT ruPmyZx/OuKqSGVA2IUMVYM+7FAMogEeVetSqF1LXSx/hDuDUlBMCzdnV/66kSFcjmM3 ApgQ+EyBEHANY1tkRnNwUH+b44vmU488QQ5JdomoC33fZnNs4DxihDlnidwmVFVqTHxP tHQw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ev6CgCUN30SpHhU0OWNhe+TiKXgb1STF4WeTuk/kYaU=; b=jFq3iiZVnVlzYYcDu0aMiAnOytnmIf0LduAfWxOO2kGrd+c7eBRRsh+859ODk0c58E zp+1gXacx4Y8SaIEEPoBMNJltA1qQvvBd4G349eg5f09fUMCwG/Q9MuObWYUnz1TeOZ0 /9hLEtVxTsqXT+gmRRAhzDiT7WPyziozJveGJsSSDKpNd+9HcoCxY3t3i+K1iemDxshM 3K4J1P4mo7DEL12QrCTK4vyVt3e8307/2fDlaol5bQ2Fuw+RjM/3suzmdjqlM1bWR1mc hyxXchjpx2gXv7j+vfsFAwUoBV5GxjI9+aZBXuW/dhWdGvKNEW674ZSq8V8KL3C6zcyq z4eA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530PD0yN2RSdpkz925e/YwgaBZrr2AuXCzzY8PzKcGWuwDWbFVq4 wMlzCuMP6Vbpx8GVgS3sXj3LUhD7h/qotIVhKjw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz19zq/e/CxbNekjRU65zqMedoObYqINT+uRaLQHzE0TByjKB3fFgwwq/qe27DbCrK2+CygUBNk+hUr1Jkyx34=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2112:: with SMTP id qn18mr4088117ejb.220.1616494256133; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 03:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:40:45 +0530
Message-ID: <CAO0Djp31X6d-P9V2zVH-UF1aWr95P+VV_9Vgp8UjxXenVb=OOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pascal Thubert <pascal.thubert@gmail.com>, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eb187a05be316500"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/Z-qbAj3atNU5LxfIr8RnKTD4f3M>
Subject: [Roll] a comment about unaware-leaves IANA section
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 10:11:17 -0000
Hi Pascal, Authors, Section 12.5 and Section 12.6 of the document <https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9010.html#name-new-subregistry-for-rpl-non> specifies the RPL Status values. I believe section 12.5 is applicable only when the 'E' bit of the status is set to 0 and Section 12.6 is applicable only when the 'E' bit is set to 1. I came across this while reviewing it in context to NPDAO compatibility. Do you think this could be explicitly stated in the document while it is in AUTH48 state? Regards, Rahul
- [Roll] a comment about unaware-leaves IANA section Rahul Jadhav
- Re: [Roll] a comment about unaware-leaves IANA se… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)