Subject: Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-05: (with COMMENT)

From: "Suresh Krishnan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 19:42:32 -0700

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 5.1, 6.1:

The IPv4-mapped IPv6 prefix for the IPv4 loopback range 127.0.0.0/8 is
incorrect.

It is currently written as 0:0:0:0:0:FFFF:7F00/104. It should instead be
0:0:0:0:0:FFFF:7F00:0/104.

Sections 5.1, 6.1:

The document just talks about the TTL field being set to 255. It does not
talk about the Hop Limit field for IPv6. I would assume you want to do
the same for IPv6 packets as for the IPv4 packets. Can you include the
Hop Limit as well if you want the same behavior for IPv6. I have two
suggested forms of changes. Pick whatever works better for you.

OLD:

TTL field of the IP header SHOULD be set to 255

NEW:

The TTL/Hop Limit field of the IP header SHOULD be set to 255

(or) 

The TTL field of the IPv4 header or the Hop Limit field of the IPv6
header SHOULD be set to 255

---

From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 13:08:54 +0000

Hi Suresh,

🎂🎼🎉

Please see inline.

> On May 4, 2016, at 10:42 PM, Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

OK — in this case, a number of Errata items should be both corrected and new ones filed. E.g.:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4379&eid=1418 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4379&eid=1418>

> The TTL/Hop Limit field of the IP header SHOULD be set to 255

Yes, I prefer this one.

Thanks!

— Carlos.