IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Roll] draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes updates RFC 4007 (Was Re: [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local)

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 17 October 2013 16:11 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.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 0723521F9C4A; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:11:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FsKPznzRxXMw; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22c.google.com (mail-pa0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8478321F9A61; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id fb1so1019392pad.31 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=QycdZMbsWrKXKVMc2LTsHhAMtORtYHVk5lpladNznsI=; b=bB+Wkk1wr+gyhB98ADdO14CZNDD0F1m7IwjPv3P8v2Brr6hT3SxxlH3VfWqvpjqZKK R0yI4sTMUXjcdjeQPgKNwOPJlERPD+Kr2nFR6KrguFntcoSQIxzxeTkByqGhoYwWI2vb Rbrzigs5XWuu6r4AZLebn3gfryPyGrBDcLnvbXhGAECLpFSP82Lqj5LjTCgvGQeOQN6Q a1L/n4jA8lvIEj/Wra4JMscs8e+LKdR6nvq3fyGhuJBa1vQw5wS9xlWSL4P5E2KPj3yP YwT71MwzCPvPryLwxz+BmGpDDCx6DZiI19xX/MvejaaG1cfwpRQNrgV//04LQAal02Jn RAMA==
X-Received: by 10.68.172.36 with SMTP id az4mr9449936pbc.48.1382026254983; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:10:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.154.37.65] (128-107-239-234.cisco.com. [128.107.239.234]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qw8sm98747783pbb.27.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABOxzu0L-EY0iDGpAJ+ER15CPL-3v8F77ewn-G=gZYODixevZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 09:10:50 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3CC8783F-F4DA-47B9-A051-DBBA6EF00C19@gmail.com>
References: <3599.1381852752@sandelman.ca> <CE82BA46.24343%d.sturek@att.net> <CABOxzu2nLuny5uySEEdb6ji9ucE6xqGZ6DLe-mc6KUqVszNfFg@mail.gmail.com> <525DC6C9.2010808@gridmerge.com> <CABOxzu2apwBRpU1h4mKJwpO+U+Y9Q_q-h5AhZ+hGzAdjdPdmUQ@mail.gmail.com> <525E5064.4050109@gridmerge.com> <CABOxzu0L-EY0iDGpAJ+ER15CPL-3v8F77ewn-G=gZYODixevZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: [Roll] draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes updates RFC 4007 (Was Re: [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 16:11:01 -0000

Kerry correctly points out that RFC 4007 and RFC 4291 are in conflict regarding the way in which multicast scope 3 is defined:

RFC 4007, section 5:

   o  The boundaries of zones of a scope other than interface-local,
      link-local, and global must be defined and configured by network
      administrators.

RFC 4291, section 2.7:

         Admin-Local scope is the smallest scope that must be
         administratively configured, i.e., not automatically derived
         from physical connectivity or other, non-multicast-related
         configuration.

Noting this conflict, I propose adding a bit of text to draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes to update RFC 4007 for consistency with RFC 4291:

Add section 3 (and renumber current section 3-5):

3.  Updates to RFC 4007, section 5

   Section 5 of RFC 4007 and section 2.7 of RFC 4291 disagree about the
   way in which multicast scope 3 is configured.  To resolve that disagreement,
   change the last bullet in the list in section 5 of RFC 4007 as follows:

OLD:

   o  The boundaries of zones of a scope other than interface-local,
      link-local, and global must be defined and configured by network
      administrators.

NEW:

   o  Admin-Local scope is the smallest scope that must be
      administratively configured, i.e., not automatically derived
      from physical connectivity or other, non-multicast-related
      configuration.

Looking for consensus in the 6man WG before I make this change...

- Ralph

On Oct 16, 2013, at 10:04 AM 10/16/13, Kerry Lynn <kerlyn@ieee.org> wrote:

> [...]

> I think Ralph's approach is the correct one.  His draft-droms-6man-multicast-scopes belongs in
> 6man as it re-defines a reserved code point in the IPv6 addressing architecture.  It nominally
> updates RFC 4291 but should probably also update RFC 4007 as these RFCs are in conflict
> regarding the automatic definition of scope 0x03.
[...]

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email