Skip to main content

IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option
draft-ietf-ipv6-ra-flags-option-02

Yes

Lars Eggert
(Jari Arkko)

No Objection

(Chris Newman)
(Dan Romascanu)
(David Ward)
(Jon Peterson)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Mark Townsley)
(Ron Bonica)
(Ross Callon)
(Sam Hartman)

No Record

(Lisa Dusseault)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 02 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert
Yes
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Chris Newman Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2007-09-05) Unknown
In the para 
  The assignment of new RA flags in the RA option header and for the
   bits defined in the RA extension option defined in this document
   require standards action or IESG approval.

I think it would be good to reference RFC 2434.
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
David Ward Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Jon Peterson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Mark Townsley Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
(was Yes) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2007-09-05) Unknown
  Based on Gen-ART Review by Joel Halpern:

  The document says that the length of the option is 1.  This is in
  multiples of 8 octets, so there is lots of room.  However, the text
  explicitly says that the length should be checked in case of future
  expansion.  It ought to specify what to do if the length is not 1.
Sam Hartman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Tim Polk Former IESG member
(was No Record, Discuss) No Objection
No Objection (2007-09-05) Unknown
As specified, this option could be used even if all advertised capabilities are in bits 0 through 7.
The router advertisement flags option should only be used if the router is advertising capabilities
that are assigned bit 8 or higher by IANA.

In my opinion, some MUST/MUST NOT language is needed.
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
(was No Objection) No Record
No Record () Unknown