> On Sep 26, 2018, at 9:36 PM, Suresh Krishnan <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19: Discuss
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This document is missing ACL handling for ICMPv6 (RFC4443) completely. As the
> ICMP types and codes are different for ICMP and ICMPv6 I think this model
> should be included to cover ICMPv6.

In offline discussions with Suresh, here is what we agreed I would do to 
address this DISCUSS:

- Update the rest-of-header field in ICMP grouping from ‘type uint32’ to ‘type 
binary’, as already agreed, to address Mirja’s DISCUSS. The field will be 
unbounded.
- Add a reference to RFC 4443 in the grouping.
- At this point the grouping should be able to cater to both icmpv4 and icmpv6 
match requirements.

Thanks

Mahesh Jethanandani
[email protected]



_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to