Re: [tsvwg] WGLC for comments for draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options

[[e-mail]]

Hi all, 

I reviewed only the diff vs -19 since the last time I reviewed the document. 

* Glad to see that FRAG use is now "limited" and even with a limit lower than what was suggested in [1]
* However, this text seems to not condition the "able to generate..." frag to the limit set in Section 11.4:

   >> An endpoint supporting UDP options MUST support those marked with
   a "*" above: EOL, NOP, APC, FRAG, MDS, MRDS, REQ, and RES. This
   includes both recognizing and being able to generate these options
   if configured to do so. These are called "must-support" options.

Adding a note would be helpful.
 
* BTW, I suggest to cite DNSSEC given that this was the main driver for the FRAG option. It is better to highlight that.
* The RES/REQ section is not anymore a placeholder, which fixes a concern I used to have [2]. Thanks.
* I think putting a magic number (hex of the RFC number to be assigned to the doc) right before the OCS will explicitly indicates that the surplus area is encoded per the current spec. Otherwise, how to determine that the first two bytes are actually for OCS.
* Some minor nits:

(1) I don't remember I have seen "Diff Svcs" in a RFC

      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |Version|  IHL  |   Diff Svcs   |          Total Length         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

(2) Not all options have a "length" 

   The remainder of the surplus area consists of options defined using
   a TLV (type, length, and optional value)


I support advancing the doc in the publication process.

Thank you very much Joe for all the effort put into this spec.

Cheers,
Med

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/wholRDLrBiSt0URtRmZ7kY8ixSg/
[2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/d8h3YbjLWsjFixsWB8IEsOksf7M/

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : tsvwg <[e-mail]> De la part de Gorry Fairhurst
> Envoyé : mercredi 10 avril 2024 10:25
> À : [e-mail]
> Objet : [tsvwg] WGLC for comments for draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options and
> draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options-dplpmtud to end 10th April 2024
> 
> 
> Please note that the 3 week WG Last Call call to determine if the
> following TSVWG IDs is about to end:
> 
> These documents both target PROPOSED STANDARD.
> 
> The document shepherd for the UDP Options will be: Gorry Fairhurst.
> The document shepherd for DPLPMTUD with UDP Options will be: Marten
> Seemann.
> 
> The WGLC will end at midnight UTC on 10th April 2024.
> 
> Please do read the drafts, and please do send any comments/concerns to
> the TSVWG mailing list, including notes on whether these are ready to
> publish (or send an email directly to the chairs<tsvwg-
> [e-mail]>).
> 
> Best wishes,
> Gorry and Marten
> (tsvwg co-chairs)
> 
> -
> 
> The IETF WG Last Call process is described in RFC 6174.
> 
> 
> 
> The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No
> SC013683.
> Tha Oilthigh Obar Dheathain na charthannas clàraichte ann an Alba,
> Àir.
> SC013683.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.