This looks more like an RFC 7401 problem than a HIP-DEX problem; as DEX
inherits this from 7401. In fact it is an RFC 5201 problem!
It looks like Suresh is correct that a code is needed and in sec 3.4 of
RFC 2463 a code is need..
I looked at:
https://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters/icmpv6-parameters.xhtml#icmpv6-parameters-codes-5
And nothing there that looks right.
So what is done in HIP BEX implementations? Both v1 and v2?
And should this be fixed in DEX or an errata for 5201 and 7401? And if
we do an errata, do we still specify the code in DEX?
Nothing is ever "straightforward to resolve" ...
On 3/3/20 11:47 PM, Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker wrote:
Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-hip-dex-13: Discuss
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-hip-dex/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This should be pretty straightforward to resolve.
* Section 5.4.:
The ICMPv6 Parameter Problem messages to be sent need a Code field to be set in
addition to the Pointer. What Code should be used in this message? Please
specify this.
--
Standard Robert Moskowitz
Owner
HTT Consulting
C:248-219-2059
F:248-968-2824
E:[email protected]
There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who
gets the credit
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
