> I see that you submitted a new revision over the weekend that addresses the > nits around 2119 and the references. However, it raised two others. You > reference both RFC1051 and 1201 (do you need the former if you have the > latter?),
We now reference neither. [JMC] In rev -09 the references to 1051 and 1201 are still present. If they are not needed (given that they are reserved and need more specification) then they should be removed from the draft altogether. Joe (The ARCNET linktypes are marked as "Reserved for"; some if not all of them, as implemented in the corresponding operating systems, have enough annoying quirks that they'd probably need a LINKTYPE_ page worth of text to explain them - the BSD ARCNET code one might, for fragmented packets, supply both the fragments *and* the reassembled packet, and I think the Linux code may shuffle some fields in the ARCNET header. So I'm just punting on giving them detailed descriptions; a subsequent I-D/RFC can be issued, changing it to point at a LINKTYPE_ page, if desired.)
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
