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]

 




Got it, thanks.

Jukka

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Jari Arkko wrote:

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]