Fernando, >>>>> As noted, I'm open to any of the two options. That said, >>>>> would a normative ref to draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit be >>>>> really appropriate/correct? >>>>> >>>>> If you think about it, that'd be an "informational reference" >>>>> rather than an authoritative one... (you don't need to read >>>>> draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit to understand >>>>> draft-ietf-6man-oversized-header-chain-05.txt). For instance, >>>>> the IANA registry itself is not a normative reference. >>>> >>>> Logically, you're correct. It would just be a shame for it to >>>> come out as a "work in progress" reference instead of an RFC. >>>> Maybe we can ask for the two RFCs to be published at the same >>>> time. >>> >>> Agreed. I will rev the I-D as described (but with an >>> informational ref to your I-D), and will note the RFC-Ed about >>> this. -- However, my take is that this will be nevertheless the >>> case (draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit will be published at the same >>> time or before oversized-header-chain). >> >> I would prefer a normative reference to the ext-transmit document >> for the definition of extension headers. > > I have no problem with that option... However, the thing is that the > reference is not normative in nature (i.e., IMHO it would be > incorrect, as discussed with Brian). (please see the P.S., anyway).
Extension Headers are defined in Section 4 of [RFC2460]. As a result of [draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit], [IANA-PROTO] provides a list of assigned Internet Protocol Numbers and designates which of those protocol numbers also represent extension headers. I'm fine with this text. I think the separation of extension headers and ULPs that ext-transmit codifies is vital for implementing oversized-header chain. could there be a reference to ext-transmit also in the terminology section? >> I agree that we should publish these two documents together. > > +1 for this. Isn't there a way to request this without a normative ref? yes, we can do that. the authors just need to request that from the RFC editor. http://www.rfc-editor.org/cluster_def.html (I assume the shepherd or chairs count for that as well.) > P.S.: Please do let me know if you'd like me to proceed with a > normative ref... either way is fine with me... let's go with normative. cheers, Ole
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
