> From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf at mit.edu>
> If a ETR receives a packet with this bit set and has not
> been explicitly configured to participate in an experiment, then
> [pick from group a].
> ...
> Group A:
> * drop the packet
> * decapsulate and process the inner packet but ignore the LISP header
I thought we had converged on another choice:
* process the packet normally, ignoring the R-bit
Part of the rationale for this behaviour is that this allows easy incremental
deployment of a new mechanism (possibly mapping-versioning [which I personally
find to be a more apropos term than 'map versioning', but I digress]), since
'new' packets will be processed appropriately by 'old' devices.
Also, use of the two header fields (24-bit and 32-bit) is controlled by
'positive' flag-bit semantics, i.e. the fields do not hold anything _unless_
the appropriate flag-bit it set. (I.e. unless L is set, the 32-bit field is
free, and similarly for N and the 24-bit field.) So, an experiment with the R
bit can use either of those fields for an 'experimental' use, provided that
appropriate flag-bit for that field is clear.
> if we're going to have a version field it be at least two bits wide.
It's not a version field, as I think of them: see my previous message
to Margaret:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp/current/msg01161.html
on this topic.
> Howevver I think it would be reasonable for the WG to decide on a
> one-bit version field
As in that message, the thinking is that since header bits are such a scarce
resource, we'd rather not devote them a priori to a 'version' field, and
preserve maximum flexibility for the future.
It's also worth pointing out that a packet with 'E' set and 'N' clear is
currently illegal, and that pattern could serve as an escape to a new header
format.
(As an interesting historical aside, there is a _long_ history of this sort
of thing in networking - the first ARPANet header was 32 bits, and it was
replaced by a 96-bit header, use of which was flagged by an 'illegal' value
of xF in a 4-bit field in the original 32-bit header!)
Noel
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.