Hi Fer,
On 06.03.2018 10:36, Fernando Gont wrote:
[RFCXXXX] represents this document.
Hex Value Binary Value
act chg rest Description Reference
--------- --- --- ------- ----------------- ----------
0x23 00 1 00011 RPL Option [RFCXXXX]
0x63 01 1 00011 RPL Option(DEPRECATED) [RFC6553][RFCXXXX]
SO, while you don't say that elsewhere, it would seem to me that you
*are* deprecating it?
Ah Ok, I understand, so yes, we deprecated the value of 0x63, but not
the option, so what about to say:
Something like: "
This option was originally specified in [RFC6553 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6553>]. [I-D.ietf-roll-useofrplinfo
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-05#ref-I-D.ietf-roll-useofrplinfo>] updates the registration made in [RFC6553 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6553>] Destination
Options and Hop-by-Hop Options registry from 0x63 to 0x23."
or
" This option was originally specified in [RFC6553
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6553>]. The value of 0x63 has been
deprecated by [I-D.ietf-roll-useofrplinfo
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-05#ref-I-D.ietf-roll-useofrplinfo>], which proposes a new value (0x23) for the RPL Option."
What do you think?
Thanks,
Ines.
Thanks!
Best regards,
_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
OPSEC@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
