Re: Traffic Selector extension

[RJ Atkinson <rja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 2, 2005, at 08:24, Markku Savela wrote:
> The list has been pretty quiet on this. Well, I have to implement
> *something* fast. I need the traffic selector extension and thus, I'm
> now adding the attached definition to my implementation.

Markku,

    If you read RFC-2367, particularly section 1.7, any private
extensions, such as your proposed extension, need to use the _X_
(or _x_) label in all names, data structures, and such like in order
to ensure portability and interoperability long term.  Further,
doing so is a requirement for compliance/conformance with RFC-2367.

    For example, this means the following changes should be made
to your extension description:
     #define SADB_X_EXT_TS  rather than   #define SADB_EXT_TS
     sadb_x_ts              rather than   sadb_ts
     sadb_x_ts_len          rather than   sadb_ts_len
     sadb_x_ts_numsel       rather than   sadb_ts_numsel
     sadb_x_selector        rather than   sadb_selector
     sadb_x_selector_proto  rather than   sadb_selector_proto
and so forth throughout your proposal.  There are more changes
than I've enumerated, but they should be simple and obvious given
those examples.

Thanks very much,

Ran
rja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx