Hi Carlos, As I already said, RFC2784 punts on IPv6; hence, there was no reason for it to cite RFC2473.
Thanks – Fred [email protected] From: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 11:30 AM To: Templin, Fred L Cc: Ronald P. Bonica; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Zuniga, Juan Carlos; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Int-area] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-intarea-gre-ipv6 Fred, On Mar 31, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Templin, Fred L <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Ron, RFC2784 punts on IPv6. From Section 9: o IPv6 as Delivery and/or Payload Protocol This specification describes the intersection of GRE currently deployed by multiple vendors. IPv6 as delivery and/or payload protocol is not included in the currently deployed versions of GRE. RFC2784 should have cited RFC2473 as the normative reference for generic encapsulation in IPv6 but didn't. But, that does not mean that your document should make the same omission. There is no current reference/citation relationship between RFC2784 and RFC2473. There is also no relevant errata filed http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2784 in the 15 years since publishing. There is no document updating either of those RFCs making your “should have” actual. Ron’s explanation below was clear on why this is so — and why this document does not link to RFC 2473. Thanks, — Carlos. Thanks - Fred [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> -----Original Message----- From: Ronald Bonica [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:26 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Templin, Fred L Cc: Zuniga, Juan Carlos; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-intarea-gre-ipv6 Fred, RFC 2784 doesn't update RFC 2473. This is because RFC 2784 doesn't levy any new requirements upon RFC 2473 implementations. Implementations that were RFC 2473 compliant the day before RFC 2784 was published remained compliant the day after RFC 2784 was published. Likewise, the current draft doesn't update RFC 2473. This is because the current draft doesn't levy any new requirements upon RFC 2473 implementations. Implementations that are RFC 2473 compliant today will remain compliant the day after the current draft is published. Ron On an even higher level note, RFC2473 already specifies generic encapsulation within IPv6 which implicitly includes GRE. So, if this document goes through it needs to say that it updates RFC2473. Thanks ? Fred [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
