IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Pretty Please? - Disposition of draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum-05

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Tue, 08 December 2020 22:01 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84AEC3A1211 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 14:01:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OtYB5FZdcYWf for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 14:01:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB8D93A120A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 14:00:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (unknown [190.179.27.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E912283C67; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 22:00:19 +0000 (UTC)
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>
References: <CAHw9_iKr2HF4iZYfDWXTqi59HHKcv3UzpLST7VB_rook3MZMWA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_i+G-j-S8H9VBf=n0L-HFXYzV6Dk0nrRpe1C_eADP+6XMg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Message-ID: <eb47292e-c024-a318-d4b5-f0bcd574ef70@si6networks.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2020 18:59:51 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_i+G-j-S8H9VBf=n0L-HFXYzV6Dk0nrRpe1C_eADP+6XMg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/APXjzqbOU7OvbZYxqaQ6QD3Okgk>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Pretty Please? - Disposition of draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum-05
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2020 22:01:04 -0000

On 8/12/20 18:13, Warren Kumari wrote:
[....]
> There are 2 options here:
> 1: We change Section 2 to use normal RFC2119/RFC8174 language. I send
> it back to the WG and it gets WGLCed as BCP.
> 
> 2: We remove Section 2, and all of the uppercase/lowercase words. I
> send it back to the WG (because of the changes) and it gets WGLCed as
> Informational again.
> 
> I really prefer Option 1 -- to me it reads much more like a BCP,
> documenting Best Current Practices for CPE implementers.

FWIW, I agree that option 1 is the way forward.

Thanks!

Regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email