Re: problem with inetCidrRouteDest/inetCidrRoutePfxLen consistency check language in draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2096-update-06.txt

[Brian Haberman]

C. M. Heard wrote:
Brian,

If interpreted literally, the following language in the DESCRIPTION
clauses for inetCidrRouteDest and inetCidrRoutePfxLen seems to
prohibit having a non-zero zone index in inetCidrRouteDest:
            The values for the index objects inetCidrRouteDest and
            inetCidrRoutePfxLen must be consistent.  When the value
            of inetCidrRouteDest is x, then the bitwise logical-AND
            of x with the value of the mask formed from the
            corresponding index object inetCidrRoutePfxLen MUST be
            equal to x.  If not, then the index pair is not
            consistent and an inconsistentName error must be
            returned on SET or CREATE requests.
This is so because the mask formed from inetCidrRoutePfxLen is
contiguous and does not include the zone index part.  Thus, the
bitwise logical-AND of the value of inetCidrRouteDest and the value
of the mask formed from the corresponding index object
inetCidrRoutePfxLen will necessarily have zeroes in the zone index
position.
It seems to me that an easy fix for this problem would be to alter
the text to exclude the zone index from the comparison.  Here is
my suggestion:
            The values for the index objects inetCidrRouteDest and
            inetCidrRoutePfxLen must be consistent.  When the value
            of inetCidrRouteDest (excluding the zone index, if one
            is present) is x, then the bitwise logical-AND
            of x with the value of the mask formed from the
            corresponding index object inetCidrRoutePfxLen MUST be
            equal to x.  If not, then the index pair is not
            consistent and an inconsistentName error must be
            returned on SET or CREATE requests.
After reading through the thread again and looking at the text, I agree
that it is wrong wrt scoped addresses.  I like your suggested text with
one caveat.  I believe we need to include some words in the DESCRIPTION
that talk about what to do when a zone index is present in the address.
I need to think some more about what that text should be and where it
should go.
Regards,
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------