search

tsvwg / draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options

0 stars 0 forks source link

Tom H: WGLC comments on Section 7: OCS #37

Open gorryfair opened 2 months ago

gorryfair commented 2 months ago

Please change "Next HDR" to "Next Header" to be consistent with RFC8200

"In effect, this document redefines the UDP "Length" field as a "trailer options offset"."

This text seems unnecessary. I would simply say that the surplus area offset can is derived from the UDP Length

"They commence with a 2-byte Option Checksum (OCS) field aligned to the first byte boundary (relative to the start of the IP datagram) of that area, using zeroes for alignment."

This description should be more specific. i.e. if the offset from the first byte of the UDP header is even then OCS begins at the surplus area, if the offset is off then there is a zero byte followed by the OCS

"OCS is not intended to prevent future non-standard uses of the surplus area, nor does it enable shared use with mechanisms that do not comply with UDP options."

(Added by GF during WGLC)

Mike-Heard commented 2 months ago

I am OK with changing "Next HDR" to "Next Header" to be consistent with RFC8200. I see no need to adopt the rest of the proposed changes.