> This is not my domain [ATM, draft-swallow], but if
> draft-swallow-pwe3-spvc-iw-01 "Mapping Addresses" is aligned with the
> ATM Forum specification "IP-Based Addressing Version 1.0", would there
> be a need for a further format other than "IPv6 AESA Compatible
> Format".
Yes it is aligned. There was some discussion as to whether any other
information might have to be carried in the HO-DSP, but currently
none is. If that were to change then I can see John R's point.
I don't agree on the use of the Select Byte requiring a new format.
Always use zero. If there is something other than zero, then that's
some additional information that is know to the hosts at each end.
IP doesn't have this level of demux. It uses protocol numbers and port
numbers (not physical ports) instead. But unless something changed in
the last decade (which is how long it's been since I considered myself
expert in NSAPs) then there is no "well known" or reserved usage of
Select Bytes. So I don't think the format has to constrain that.
But we also have yet to say that we need to change the select byte.
As long as they remain aligned, we only need one ICP. And I would
further argue that if only the select byte is modified, then we still
only need one.
At the momenent, my draft has not been formally accepted. My suggestion
would be that I co-author a draft with someone from the ATM Forum to
secure the codepoint from IANA. The codepoint 0000 is alread assinged
by IANA.
...George
========================================================================
George Swallow Cisco Systems (978) 936-1398
1414 Massachusetts Avenue
Boxborough, MA 01719
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
