Re: comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-00.txt

[Brian Haberman <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Juergen's suggestion as well.  The scoped addr arch
should mandate the use of 0 as the default zone ID.

Brian

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 03:37:47PM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / ?$B?@L@C#:H wrote:
> 
>>>   I am not sure why this is helpful. Is there a particular reason why
>>>   we can not just say that the default zone is indicated by a zone
>>>   index which MUST (or SHOULD if we have to compromise) be zero?
>>
>>Hmm, from a quick re-read of the draft, I don't see a particular
>>reason for not using a stronger word.  Perhaps the intention was the
>>choice is purely local to the node.  Even so, if using a specific
>>requirement helps the MIB work, I think it is reasonable to use a
>>strong word.  So, could you tell me the MIB document that can be
>>clearer if we use MUST or SHOULD to specify the default zone ID?
> 
> 
> The document in question is <draft-ietf-ops-rfc3291bis-01.txt> and
> it says in several places that 0 refers to the default zone. It would
> be nice if the scoping architecture could actually back this up by at
> least saying the default zone SHOULD be identified by the zone index 0.
> 
> /js
> 


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------