Here is the text I put together for revising sec 5.4 (see below).
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.
5.4. ICMP Messages When a HIP implementation detects a problem with an incoming packet, and it either cannot determine the identity of the sender of the packet or does not have any existing HIP association with the sender of the packet, it MAY respond with an ICMP packet. Any such reply MUST be rate-limited as described in [RFC4443]. In most cases, the ICMP packet has the Parameter Problem type (12 for ICMPv4, 4 for ICMPv6) and Code of 0. The Pointer field pointing to the field that caused the ICMP message to be generated, for example to the first 8 bytes of a UDP payload for "SPI is Unknown". The problem cases specified in Section 5.4. of [RFC7401] also apply to HIP DEX. _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
