Re: Last Call: draft-manner-router-alert-iana (IANA Considerations for the IPv4 and IPv6 Router Alert Option) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jukka,

Both registries will use 32 values for the aggregation levels. For IPv6 RAO, value 3 is removed but value 35 is kept. Thus, IPv6 will have values 4-35 (=32 values) for the 32 levels.

OK

We can make this more clear, yet, I already answered a question from IANA about this a couple of weeks ago, so they are aware of how the registry should be changed.
Which is good, but I was hoping the RFC itself would also be clear on this. How about this:

OLD:
  | 3        | Aggregated Reservation  | Aggregated Reservation       |
  |          | Nesting Level 3         | Nesting Level 0 [RFC3175]    |
  |          | [RFC3175]               |                              |
NEW:
  | 3        | Aggregated Reservation  | Aggregated Reservation       |
  |          | Nesting Level 3         | Nesting Level 0 [RFC3175](*) |
  |          | [RFC3175]               |                              |

OLD:
  Note (*): The entry in the above table for the IPv6 RAO Value of 35
  (Aggregated Reservation Nesting Level 32) has been marked due to an
  inconsistency in the text of [RFC3175], and that is consequently
  reflected in the IANA registry.  In that document the values 3-35
  (i.e. 33 values) are defined for nesting levels 0-31 (i.e. 32
  levels).

  It is unclear why nesting levels begin at 1 for IPv4 (described in
  section 1.4.9 of [RFC3175]) and 0 for IPv6 (allocated in section 6 of
  [RFC3175]).
NEW:
  Note (*): The entry in the above table for the IPv6 RAO Value of 35
  (Aggregated Reservation Nesting Level 32) has been marked due to an
  inconsistency in the text of [RFC3175], and that is consequently
  reflected in the IANA registry.  In that document the values 3-35
  (i.e. 33 values) are defined for nesting levels 0-31 (i.e. 32
  levels). Similarly, value 3 is duplicate, because aggregation
  level 0 means end-to-end signaling, and this already has an IPv6
  RAO value "1" assigned.

  Also note that nesting levels begin at 1 for IPv4 (described in
  section 1.4.9 of [RFC3175]) and 0 for IPv6 (allocated in section 6 of
  [RFC3175]).

  Section 3.2 of this document redefines these so that for IPv6,
  value 3 is no longer used and values 4-35 represent levels
  1-32. This removes the above inconsistencies.

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]