IPv4LL Issue: Miscellaneous -09 NITs
Bernard Aboba <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.zeroconf |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Submitter: Thomas Narten Submitter email address: [email protected] Date first submitted: September 25, 2003 Reference: Document: IPv4LL-09 Comment type: E/T Priority: S Section: Various Rationale/Explanation of issue: Throughout the document, change the unprintable character <B4> to "'" In the abstract, change: "Communication using Link-Local IPv4 addresses is not suitable for communication with devices not directly connected to the same physical (or logical) link." To: "Link-Local IPv4 addresses are not suitable for communication with devices not directly connected to the same physical (or logical) link, and are only used where stable, routable addresses are not available (such as on ad hoc or isolated networks). This document does not recommend that Link-Local IPv4 addresses and routable addresses be configured simultaneously on the same interface." In Section 1.2, change: "Wherever this document uses the term "host" when describing use of Link-Local IPv4 addresses, the text applies equally to routers using Link-Local IPv4 addresses on any or all interfaces." To: "Wherever this document uses the term "host" when describing use of Link-Local IPv4 addresses, the text applies equally to routers when they are the source of or intended destination of packets containing Link-Local IPv4 source or destination addresses." Add the following sentence to Section 1.4: "This document does not recommend that Link-Local IPv4 addresses and routable addresses be configured simultaneously on the same interface." In Section 2.2 change: "If, by PROBE_MAX seconds after the transmission of the last ARP probe no conflicting ARP Reply has been received, then the host has successfully claimed the desired Link-Local IPv4 address." To: "If, by PROBE_MAX seconds after the transmission of the last ARP probe no conflicting ARP Reply or ARP probe has been received, then the host has successfully claimed the desired Link-Local IPv4 address." Change IANA considerations from: "The following terms are used here with the meanings defined in BCP 26: "name space", "assigned value", "registration". The following policies are used here with the meanings defined in BCP 26: "Private Use", "First Come First Served", "Expert Review", "Specification Required", "IESG Approval", "IETF Consensus", "Standards Action". The IANA has allocated the prefix 169.254/16 for the use described in this document. The first and last 256 addresses in this range (169.254.0.x and 169.254.255.x) are allocated by Standards Action. No other IANA services are required by this document." To: "The IANA has allocated the prefix 169.254/16 for the use described in this document. The first and last 256 addresses in this range (169.254.0.x and 169.254.255.x) are allocated by Standards Action, as defined in BCP 26. No other IANA services are required by this document." In Section 10: Remove [RFC1122] and [RFC2181] from the references since they are not referred to.