Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-subnet-model-00.txt

[Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan at ericsson.com>]

Hi Hemant,
   I went through the document and it looks very good. There is just one 
thing I would like to comment on.

* The document claims to only clarify RFC4861 but it overreaches a bit. 
If you look at section 2 bullet 3, this lays out a NEW rule for a host 
to follow. This rule does not exist in RFC4861. I personally feel that 
this rule is intuitive and desirable, but it is certainly not backward 
compatible.

Cheers
Suresh

Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> Could you please review this draft now that it's a 6man WG work item. So
> far this version has taken care of comments on an earlier version that
> the following folks reviewed. 
> 
> Suresh Krishnan
> Jinmei Tatuya
> Thomas Narten
> Ralph Droms
> 
> Brian Carpenter sent us a private email on his review of this version.
> We have taken care of his review as follows. 
> 
> At the end of section 2, the following paragraph has been changed from
> 
> [This case is analogous to the behavior
> specified in the last paragraph of section 7.2.2 of
> [RFC4861]: when address resolution fails, the host SHOULD
> send an ICMPv6 Destination Unreachable indication as
> specified in [RFC4861].  The specified behavior MAY be
> extended to cover this case where address resolution cannot
> be performed.]
> 
> to
> 
> [This case is specified in the last paragraph of section 4 of
> [RFC4943]: when there is no route to destination, the host 
> should send an ICMPv6 Destination Unreachable indication 
> (for example, a locally delivered error message) as
> specified in the Terminology section of [RFC4861].]
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Hemant
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:00 AM
> To: i-d-announce at ietf.org
> Cc: ipv6 at ietf.org
> Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-subnet-model-00.txt 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group of the
> IETF.
> 
> 
> 	Title           : IPv6 Subnet Model: the Relationship between
> Links and Subnet Prefixes
> 	Author(s)       : H. Singh, et al.
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-subnet-model-00.txt
> 	Pages           : 8
> 	Date            : 2008-05-08
> 
> IPv6 specifies a model of a subnet that is different than the IPv4
> subnet model.  The subtlety of the differences has resulted in incorrect
> implementations that do not interoperate.  This document spells out the
> most important difference; that an IPv6 address isn't automatically
> associated with an IPv6 on-link prefix.
> 
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-subnet-model-00
> .txt
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
> Internet-Draft.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6 at ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------