On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:53:59PM -0600, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > Sorry for the slow reply -- you caught me right as I was leaving for > vacation. > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:53:20AM +0100, Peter Psenak wrote: > > > > On 05/12/18 04:44 , Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > > > > > > I'm also not entirely sure how to construct the prefix range just given > > > this format description. Suppose I have an IPv4 prefix of 18.18/16 and a > > > range size of 4; my prefix length is 16 and the address prefix is encoded > > > as 0x120120000. Am I then representing the four prefixes 18.18/16, > > > 18.19/16, 18.20/16, and 18.21/16? > > > > yes. > > > > > Or am I constrained to be a subset of > > > 18.18/18 (in which case I don't know what the actual distinct prefixes > > > would be)? The examples in Section 6 suggests the former, but I would > > > suggest > > > stating this explictly, here. > > > > > > > I would thing that the example in section 16 is clear enough. > > I generally prefer to describe the normative behavior in actual text > description instead of relying on examples to clarify the expected > behavior. That said, this is a non-blocking comment, so feel free to > retain the current text. If you did want to add something, I would > propose the strawman: > > OLD: > The range represents the contiguous set of prefixes with the same > prefix length as specified by the Prefix Length field. The set > starts with the prefix that is specified by the Address Prefix field. > The number of prefixes in the range is equal to the Range size. > > NEW: > The range represents the contiguous set of prefixes with the same > prefix length as specified by the Prefix Length field. The set > starts with the prefix that is specified by the Address Prefix field and > continues with the subsequent prefixes of the same length, forming a > contiguous block of addresses. Since the Range Size is not restricted to a > power of two, this new block of addresses may not be describable using a > single address prefix/length. The number of prefixes in the range is > equal to the Range size.
Ah, now I see the text proposed in response to Suresh's comments; that text works for me, too. -Benjamin _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
