On Mar 9, 2015, at 19:19, Brian Haberman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Gregg, > > On 3/9/15 1:09 PM, Gregg Schudel (gschudel) wrote: >> >> On Mar 9, 2015, at 7:07 AM, Brian Haberman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 2/6/15 12:58 PM, Gregg Schudel (gschudel) wrote: >>>> >>>> On Feb 6, 2015, at 7:44 AM, Brian Haberman >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> It turns out that the discussion during review was with the >>>>> upper limit. I can't find any reference to discussions on the >>>>> lower limit. Authors? >>>> >>>> going back to check Brian - it was a while ago. >>> >>> Have we gotten anywhere with this check? The erratum is sitting in >>> a less-than-useful state at this point. >>> >>> Regards, Brian >> >> Hi Brian I’m really sorry about droppng this. >> >> I’ve checked internal notes, authors, etc. I cannot find any record >> of (nor do we recall) us discussing “minimum length.” Looking at it >> now, the value of “5” in RFC7052 does not match any “real minimum >> length” that we can see. >> >> Further, (in discussing with Isidor), the ability to return >> unspecified as an empty address, hence “0” length, makes sense. >> >> So, again - the errate makes sense. No evidence is available to >> indicate otherwise. >> > > Isidor and I discussed whether changing all the lower bounds of 5 to 0 > made sense or if there was a smaller subset of variables that should be > changed. > > Isidor insisted on lispEidRegistrationLastRegisterSenderLength being > changed, but there are potentially others. > > I do not want to see a slew of errata roll in over the years changing > one variable's lower limit at a time. Keeping in mind, a change for one > variable actually requires a change to two variables (the affected > variable and its corresponding Length variable). > > Can the WG identify all the MIB variables that it wants changed with > this erratum? The reason for which I think lispEidRegistrationLastRegisterSender is the only use of LispAddressType that needs to be changed is that its access is "read-only". All other uses are "not-accessible” and part of the index of tables. thanks Isidor _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
