The changes look good to me; I just want to make sure you understand one
of my questions that doesn't look like it was clear enough:
On 1/15/2024 4:13 AM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
- The way an implementation understands the TCP ExIDs may benefit
from slightly more explanation:
-- In 4.2 and 4.3, is the idea that the implementation is just
sampling the
16 or 32 bits following the experimental option kind being
indicated, and
assuming those 2 or 4 bytes to be ExIDs? From Section 6.2, I
got the sense
that the implementation is aware of particular ExID values
specifically, to
know if they should be reported as 2 or 4 byte values.
[Med] 2-byte IDs are reported in tcpSharedOptionExID16 while 4-byte IDs are
reported in tcpSharedOptionExID32.
Are you expecting the implementation to have an exhaustive list of all
of the ExIDs in use to understand the difference between 2 and 4 byte
usage? I don't quite understand how this is supposed to work at the
sampling point, since it's the TCP implementation that interprets the
option and determines whether it is to be interpreted as containing (1)
no ExID, (2) a 16-bit ExID, (3) a 32-bit ExID. This information is not
available within the protocol to a third party. The third party would
need a list of ExIDs in-use in order to understand them._______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
