Re: [Roll] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Alvaro Retana <[e-mail]>]

On September 11, 2020 at 3:37:32 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:

> Pascal, can we make this say: For a MOP value of 7, there is no "T" flag,
> and the compression behaviour will be defined by future work.


If we do that, this would be the first document to indicate that the
flags apply to some MOPs and not other.  In this case the bit used for
the T flag would still be available for MOP 7.

Besides possibly updating rfc6550 to indicate that this is possible,
we will also need to update the registry so that we can show how the
bits are allocated: bit 2 is allocated for 0-6, and available for MOP
7.

All that can be done.

I was trying to avoid that work given that we don't know exactly what
MOP 7 will be; while there's a chance that the mopex draft will build
on the changes we would do here, there could also be a chance that it
doesn't.

In any case, this is probably something that needs to be discussed in the WG.


Alvaro.