Tom,
That thought crossed my mind last week. So, I posted a version 02 immediately
after posting version 01.
The fix is in version 02. Also added you to the acknowledgement section.
Happy Thanksgiving,
Ron
Juniper Business Use Only
________________________________
From: Tom Herbert <tom=40herbertland....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2024 6:08 PM
To: Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net>
Cc: int-area@ietf.org <int-area@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] ICMP Extension Header Length Field
[External Email. Be cautious of content]
On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 7:45 AM Ron Bonica
<rbonica=40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Tom,
>
> Good idea!
>
> We could make it an 8-bit field representing 4 bytes of options.
>
> So:
>
> everything in the header is 8-bit aligned
> we can still support 1,024 bytes of options!
Hi Ron,
Thanks for changing that, but can you align the length field byte to
an eight bit boundary? It's nicer to a CPU processing the header.
Maybe a format like:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Version| Rsvd | Length |
Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Tom
>
> Ron
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> ________________________________
> From: Tom Herbert <tom=40herbertland....@dmarc.ietf.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2024 10:17 AM
> To: Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net>
> Cc: int-area@ietf.org <int-area@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] ICMP Extension Header Length Field
>
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
> >From the draft:
>
> "This field represents the total length of all options contained in
> the ICMP Extension Structure. It does not include the length of the
> Extension Header. The length is measured in bytes. Legacy
> implementations set this field to 0."
>
> Alternatively, could the length be specified in units of four bytes? I
> believe all the options should have length of four bytes (i.e. padding
> isn't needed), and it's always good practice to ensure that the thing
> following the extension header is four byte aligned. This also would
> have the nice side effect that the length field could be in one
> aligned byte instead of an awkward ten bit field.
>
> Tom
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 6:42 AM Ron Bonica
> <rbonica=40juniper....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Please review and comment on ICMP Extension Header Length Field, It
> > proposes to add a length attribute to the ICMP Extension Structure,
> >
> > The draft is only 4 pages long, including boilerplate, so it shouldn't take
> > much time to review. However, there is some urgency because other drafts
> > rely on this length attribute.
> >
> >
> > Chairs,
> >
> > Could we have a call for adoption when some reviews have come in?
> >
> >
> > Ron
> >
> > Juniper Business Use Only
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Int-area mailing list -- int-area@ietf.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to int-area-le...@ietf.org
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list -- int-area@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to int-area-le...@ietf.org
