Re: Which IPv6 Option Types are reserved for testing?

[luo.chao@zte.com.cn]

Why don't people pay attention to this topic? I do consider it a 
limitation of current specs.

Regards,
LC

Jeroen Massar wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am currently extending AYIYA to do proper multihoming.
>As I intend to do wider-scale testing, outside of the very small test
>setup I am currently using, I was wondering what Option Types are
>reserved or can be used for this kind of testing. Because, just like the
>206 ICMPv6 option for MLDv2, changing it after it has been circulated
>quite a bit can be a bit painful, indeed it is a part of the kernel.
>Reading: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-parameters
>
>It apparently contains no reserved ones. Typically it would need a:
>
>act chg rest
>--- --- -----
> 11  0  xxxxx AYIYA Option Header
>
>But what can I use for the last 5 bits?
>Exact contents of this header will come in the next update, -03 version
>of the AYIYA draft, which will also describe how it is used and 
>
>I could of course fill in a general request form at IANA but then they
>will probably say that you need an RFC and bladiebla... while I just
>want to let people test it first ;) You need implementations of a thing
>anyway before it can become an rfc usually, this there is a small loop
>there.
>
>Greets,
> Jeroen
>
>PS: Yes, draft-ietf-multi6-things-to-think-about questions are answered
>positively and no dependency on DNS etc ;)



*******************************************
æ?¬é?®ä»¶å·²ç»?è¿?å??å?¾é?®ä»¶è¿?滤ï¼?å¦?å??ç?°å??å?¾
é?®ä»¶ï¼?请转å??è?³ï¼?helpdesk@zte.com.cn
*******************************************