On 09/09/2021 17:18, Nagendra Kumar Nainar (naikumar) wrote:
HI Tom,
Apologies for the delay. Please see below for our response.
s.6
" This document specifies that the above code points will be used only
for OSPFv2."
Perhaps a place for a 'SHALL'.
<Nagendra> Since the code point should be used only for OSPFv2, should we use “SHOULD”?.
Well, they are different. SHALL is the same as MUST in RFC2119, an
absolute requirement of the specification.
SHOULD allows for valid reasons to ignore the requirement and usually,
although not always, is accompanied by text indicating when it is valid
to ignore it.
'will be used only' comes across to me as a SHALL, not a SHOULD (as does
a read of RFC8287).
Tom Petch
Thanks,
Nagendra
From: tom petch <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, June 11, 2021 at 5:01 AM
To: last-call@xxxxxxxx <last-call@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: mpls@xxxxxxxx <mpls@xxxxxxxx>, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint@xxxxxxxx <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint@xxxxxxxx>, mpls-chairs@xxxxxxxx <mpls-chairs@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint-04.txt> (OSPFv3 CodePoint for MPLS LSP Ping) to Proposed Standard
On 07/06/2021 14:40, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG
(mpls) to consider the following document: - 'OSPFv3 CodePoint for MPLS LSP
Ping'
<draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint-04.txt> as Proposed Standard
s.6
" This document specifies that the above code points will be used only
for OSPFv2."
Perhaps a place for a 'SHALL'.
Tom Petch
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2021-06-21. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
IANA has created "Protocol in the Segment IS Sub-TLV" and "Protocol
in the Label Stack Sub-TLV of the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV"
registries under the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters" registry. RFC8287 defines the
code points for OSPF and IS-IS.
This document proposes the code point to be used in the Segment ID
Sub-TLV and Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV when the IGP is OSPFv3.
This document also updates RFC8287 by clarifying that the existing
"OSPF" code point is to be used only to indicate OSPFv2, and by
defining the behavior when the Segment ID SUb-TLV indicates the use
of IPv6.
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-ospfv3-codepoint/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
.
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
