[pim] Re: draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps issue (s)

Thanks for the feedback, Toerless! We uploaded v12:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps/

Please let us know if this addresses your concerns.

Cheers,

Nate

From: Toerless Eckert <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2025 17:26
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [pim] draft-ietf-pim-zeroconf-mcast-addr-alloc-ps issue(s)

Just doing RTGDIR review of draft-ietf-pim-ipv6-zeroconf-assignment and stumbling across the following in subject draft: So far, the whole justification of the draft, avoidance of collisions at link-layer is only written out in the explanatory


Just doing RTGDIR review of draft-ietf-pim-ipv6-zeroconf-assignment

and stumbling across the following in subject draft:



So far, the whole justification of the draft, avoidance of collisions

at link-layer is only written out in the explanatory text, but not

mentioned in the requirements:



[REQ-1] Unique Address Assignment: Use of the solution SHALL

result in a unique address being assigned to the multicast group.



replace for example:



[REQ-1] Unique Address Assignment: Use of the solution SHALL

result in an assignment of an IPv4 and/or IPv6 multicast address

that is unique, and whose link-layer address is also unique.



also:



[REQ-8] Collision Detection and Resolution: The solution SHALL

include mechanisms to detect and resolve multicast address

collisions.



maybe:



[REQ-8] Collision Detection and Resolution: The solution SHALL

include mechanisms to detect and resolve multicast address

collisions including collisions at the link-layer.



Haven't thought about the right wording in too much detail. But

its IMHO front and center to ensure the link layer collision

avoidance is explicitly mentioned in those requirements.



more minor:



I can not find an explanation as to what CONS-6 would be good for.

Some example would be good. Is this for example about enumeration

of all used addresses for network management purposes ? Then maybe

rephrase accordingly "Third-party (network management) application

SHOULD be capable to determine all currently used addresses".



CONS-7 is also unclear. Again, think of explicit goal and try to

rephrase accordingly.



Cheers

    Toerless



_______________________________________________

pim mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

________________________________

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contain information that may be Garmin confidential and/or Garmin legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication (including attachments) by someone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. Thank you.

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]