I verified that the example in Appendix A of RFC 8031 is incorrect as
reported, but I do not believe that updating the values as suggested
in this errata completely fixes the example.
The corrected values given in the report are valid if they are
interpreted as little-endian encoded coordinates
Robert, thanks for your review. I entered a No Objection ballot.
Alissa
> On Nov 14, 2020, at 4:32 PM, Robert Sparks via Datatracker
> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review result: Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART)
Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ipv6-ipv4-codes-05: Yes
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
Hi Erik ,
Thank you for the comments.
Focusing on the second question as I already clarified the first one.
The notification codes are designed so that the responder will always reply
with the same values (that reflect its capabilities) and not as a function of
the request. So, both codes
