Hi Éric, Thank you for pointing this out. Since this is specified in Section 4.1 and there's an associated subregistry for the I-field, we've gone ahead and made the update:
Address Registration Option Flags registry: 4-5 I-Field (2 bits) [RFC8505, Section 4.1] Please see https://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters I included the section number as it's not referenced in the IC section. If any other changes are required, just let us know. Thanks, Sabrina On Thu Jun 26 12:17:40 2025, [email protected] wrote: > Dear IANA, > > It seems that RFC 8505 failed to specify all IANA instructions for > “ICMPv6 Address Registration Option Flags” registry [1]: > > * Section 4.1 clearly specifies a 2-bit “I” field and specifies its > position in figure 1, the same section defines the “R” and “T” flags > * Section 9.1 forgot to specify this “I” field in addition to the > “R” and “T” flags :-( > > As RFC 8505 is published and as this registry registration procedure > is “IETF review or IESG approval”, I think that the IETF review has > already been done for the I-field, so, can IANA simply update the > registry by adding: > “4-5 ; I-Field (2 bits) ; RFC 8505” ? Else, I will request IESG > approval, but let’s keep it simple *if possible*. > > May I kindly request to keep Mohamed Boucadair and the 6LO WG in copy > for all follow-up email messages ? > > Regards > > -éric > > [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters/icmpv6- > parameters.xhtml#icmpv6-adress-registration-option-flags _______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
