[Rps] Re: Latest RPSLng draft

On 21 Nov 2003, Larry J. Blunk wrote:
>   I forgot to add that there is also an HTML version
> available at www.radb.net/rpslng.html

Sorry.. I tried to follow up on this quicker, but forgot.

A glanced through the diffs between the documents.  Seems pretty good.  
The one high-level comment still left is that I think it would
probably make a bit more sense to specify that "ipv4" means
"ipv4.unicast,ipv4.multicast" and the same for IPv6 -- that is, do not
assume that only unicast would be specified by default.  But I don't
feel really strongly about this.

A couple of minor issues..

   <remote-endpoint-address> indicates the IPv4 or IPv6 address of the
   remote endpoint of the tunnel. The address family must match that of
   the local endpoint. <encapsulation> denotes the encapsulation used in
   the tunnel and is one of {GRE,IPinIP}.  Routing policies for these
   routers should be described in the appropriate classes (eg. (e.g.
   aut-num).

==> This was changed to remove IPv6inIP (for the good), but maybe one 
should add a brief note on this, like reword to:

   <remote-endpoint-address> indicates the IPv4 or IPv6 address of the
   remote endpoint of the tunnel. The address family must match that of
   the local endpoint. <encapsulation> denotes the encapsulation used in
   the tunnel and is one of {GRE,IPinIP} (note the outer and inner IP 
   protocol versions can be deduced from the interface context -- so 
   e.g., IPv6-in-IPv4 encapsulation is just IPinIP).  Routing policies 
   for these routers should be described in the appropriate classes 
   (eg. (e.g. aut-num).

nits:

Abstract

   This memo presents a new set of simple extensions to the Routing
   Policy Specification Language (RPSL) [1] enabling the language to
   document routing policies for the IPv6 and multicast address families
   currently used in the Internet.

==> remove the reference ([1]) from the abstract, it isn't allowed per 
IESG's ID-nits.  It's good as it is without it.
==> I'd also state a very obvious thing that RPSLng is a superset of 
RPSL; this could be done by rewording s/enabling the language to 
document/enabling the language to also document/ 

The
   keyword "ANY" many also be used instead of prefix ranges

==> s/many/may/ ?

Thanks.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
Rps mailing list
Rps@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rps