[ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-arch - ending 3/24
Hugh Holbrook <holbrook@cisco.com> Sun, 02 March 2003 10:14 UTC
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09229 for <ssm-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 05:14:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h22AN7p27445; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 05:23:07 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h22AFYp27269 for <ssm@optimus.ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 05:15:34 -0500
Received: from sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA09175 for <ssm@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 05:05:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: from holbrook-laptop.cisco.com (sjc-vpn3-258.cisco.com [10.21.65.2]) by sj-msg-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h22A7KP7007149 for <ssm@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 02:07:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by holbrook-laptop.cisco.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4979A10B7A7; Sun, 2 Mar 2003 02:03:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Hugh Holbrook <holbrook@cisco.com>
To: ssm@ietf.org
Reply-To: holbrook@cisco.com
Message-Id: <20030302100337.4979A10B7A7@holbrook-laptop.cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 02:03:37 -0800
Subject: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-arch - ending 3/24
Sender: ssm-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: ssm-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ssm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm>, <mailto:ssm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Source-Specific Multicast <ssm.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ssm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ssm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm>, <mailto:ssm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Hi, folks. I've just submitted draft-ietf-ssm-arch-02.txt to the internet draft repository. Until it shows up, you can retrieve it from http://sith.maoz.com/SSM/draft-ietf-ssm-arch-02.txt There were enough changes to the draft that I'd like to do one more working group last call. I've included below the list of changes from my last mail. The only other change was that I changed a SHOULD (for ignoring non-source-specific requests) in section 8 to a MUST, to be consistent with Section 5.2. I would particularly appreciate any comments on the Security Considerations section, as this has seen the least review. This last call expires March 24th. -Hugh -------------------------------- - [pavlin] Added text: OS API should return an error for a (*,G) request on an SSM address. - [pavlin] Added a note about limitations of SSM. (1) Any multi-source aspect apps must be implemented in the application layer. (2) SSM does not support network-layer resource discovery. - [pekka/brian] Added clarification about the SSM address range FF3x::/32 is reserved for SSM P=1 and T=1 and plen=0 is required. Thus, FF3x::/96 is the actual range today because network prefix field must be zero But we leave open the possibility of putting something else in the network prefix field. - [pavlin] Changed erroneous FF2x:: to FF3x:: - [pekka] New text on administrative scoping to describe admin-scoping in v6 and to clarify that there is none for IPv4. - [pekka] New text on source routing: A router SHOULD NOT allow source-routing to an SSM addr; MAY have a config option to allow it - [me/bweis/mbaugher] Add security considerations text describing the IPSec/SSM issue. - Minor things: - [pavlin] Use consistent capitalization on v6 addresses - [me] Use consistent capitalization of Source-Specific - [pavlin] id-nits - Removed references from abstract and shortened it - Modified address ranges - Added IPR notice and Copyright Statement. - [brad] Changed author mailing address _______________________________________________ ssm mailing list ssm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ssm
- [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-arch -… Hugh Holbrook
- Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-ar… Pekka Savola
- Re: Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ss… Hugh Holbrook
- Re: Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ss… Pekka Savola
- Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-ar… Brian Haberman
- Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-ar… Pekka Savola
- Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-ar… Brian Haberman
- Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-ar… Pekka Savola
- Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-ar… Brian Haberman
- Re: Re: Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-iet… Hugh Holbrook
- [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [was ...la… Hugh Holbrook
- [ssm] permanent ipv6 ssm addresses [was ...last c… Hugh Holbrook
- Re: [ssm] permanent ipv6 ssm addresses [was ...la… Brian Haberman
- Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ssm-ar… Brian Haberman
- Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [was .… Brian Haberman
- Re: Re: [ssm] permanent ipv6 ssm addresses [was .… Hugh Holbrook
- Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [was .… Pekka Savola
- Re: Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [w… Hugh Holbrook
- Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [was .… Brian Haberman
- Re: Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [w… Pekka Savola
- Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 Hitoshi Asaeda
- Re: Re: Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v… Hugh Holbrook
- Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 Pekka Savola
- Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [was .… Brian Haberman
- Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [was .… Pekka Savola
- Re: Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [w… Hugh Holbrook
- Re: Re: [ssm] what to say about scoping for v6 [w… Pekka Savola
- Re: Re: [ssm] another last call for draft-ietf-ss… Hugh Holbrook