Subject: (ngtrans) draft-ietf-ngtrans-ipv4survey-02 review

From: Jean-François Boudreault <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 09:51:45 -0400

Hi,

	I sent you a mail few months ago concerning your draft on ipv4survey. It was 
about an IPv4 dependance of the NTP protocol. I include the mail as it could 
be interesting to add this in your draft as being a good example of IETF 
standards IPv4 dependance.

Regards,

JF.

-- 

-------------------------------
Jean-Francois Boudreault
http://www.viagenie.qc.ca
tel: +1-418-656-9254x228
-------------------------------

-------------------------------
Free IPv6 Connectivity
http://www.freenet6.net
-------------------------------

Hi Philip,

	I reviewed your draft on IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF
Standards. NTP is a good example of current IPv4 dependance in IETF
standards. We worked a lot on the NTP protocol last summer to port the
current application from www.ntp.org to support IPv6. There's a problem with
the current NTP protocol definition regarding the Reference Clock Identifier
(REFID) :

3.12 RFC 1305 Network Time Protocol (Version 3)

Section 3.2.1 Common Variables defines the following variables definitions

	Reference Clock Identifier (sys.refid, peer.refid, pkt.refid): This is a
32-bit code identifying the particular reference clock. [...] In the case of
stratum 2 and greater (secondary reference) this is the four-octet Internet
address of the peer selected for synchronization.

We wrote a draft to review differents solutions to this problem :
(http://www.viagenie.qc.ca/fr/ipv6/ietf/draft-ipv6-ntp-refid.txt).

If you have any question, feel free to ask them to [email-masked].

In hope this could help you, regards,

Jean-Francois Boudreault
Viagenie

-------------------------------------------------------