[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-dearlove-manet-tlv-naming) 00 01 02 03 04 05 RFC 7631

Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET)                             C. Dearlove
Internet-Draft                                           BAE Systems ATC
Updates: 5444 (if approved)                                   T. Clausen
Intended status: Standards Track                LIX, Ecole Polytechnique
Expires: November 8, 2015                                    May 7, 2015


       TLV Naming in the MANET Generalized Packet/Message Format
                     draft-ietf-manet-tlv-naming-02

Abstract

   TLVs (type-length-value structures) as defined by RFC5444 have both a
   type (one octet) and a type extension (one octet), together forming a
   full type (of two octets).  RFC5444 sets up IANA registries for TLV
   types, specifying that an allocation of a TLV type entails creation
   of an IANA registry for the corresponding type extensions.

   In some cases, reserving all 256 type extensions for use for a common
   purpose for a given TLV is meaningful, and thus it makes sense to
   record a common name for such a TLV type (and all of its type
   extensions) in the corresponding IANA registries.  An example of such
   is a LINK_METRIC TLV Type, with its type extensions reserved for use
   to be indicating the "kind" of metric expressed by the value of the
   TLV.

   In some other cases, there may not be 256 full types that share a
   common purpose and, as such, it is not meaningful to record a common
   name for all the type extensions for a TLV type in the corresponding
   IANA registries.  Rather, it is appropriate to record an individual
   name per full type.

   This document reorganizes the naming of already allocated TLV types
   and type extensions in those registries to use names appropriately.
   It has no consequences in terms of any protocol implementation.

   This document also updates the Expert Review guidelines from RFC5444,
   so as to establish a policy for consistent naming of future TLV type
   and type extension allocations.  It makes no other changes to
   RFC5444.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute



Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on November 8, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.



























Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     3.1.  Expert Review: Evaluation Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     3.2.  Updated IANA Registries  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   5.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   6.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15








































Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


1.  Introduction

   This document reorganizes and rationalizes the naming of TLVs (type-
   length-value structures), defined by [RFC5444] and recorded by IANA
   in the Mobile Ad hoc NETwork (MANET) Parameters registries "Packet
   TLV Types", "Message TLV Types", and "Address Block TLV Types".

   This document reorganizes the naming of already allocated Packet,
   Message and Address Block TLV types, and their corresponding Type
   Extensions, and updates corresponding IANA registries.

   TLVs have a type (one octet) and a type extension (one octet) which
   together form a full type (of two octets).  A TLV may omit the type
   extension when it is zero, but that applies only to its
   representation, it still has a type extension of zero.  A TLV type
   defines an IANA registry of type extensions for that type.

   There have been two forms of TLV allocation.

   The first, but less common, form of allocation has been that
   allocation of the type has immediately defined (but not necessarily
   allocated) all the corresponding type extensions for versions of that
   type.  This applies, for example, to the Address Block TLV
   LINK_METRIC specified in [RFC7181].  The LINK_METRIC type extensions
   are all available for allocation for different definitions of link
   metric.  It is appropriate in this case to apply the name LINK_METRIC
   to the type, and also to all the full types corresponding to that
   type, as has been done.  Type extensions can then be individually
   named, or can be simply referred to by their number.

   The second, more common, form of allocation has been that for a TLV
   type, only type extension 0, and possibly the type extension 1, are
   defined.  An example is the Address Block TLV LINK_STATUS defined in
   [RFC6130], where only type extension 0 is allocated.  It is not
   reasonable to assume that the remaining 255 type extensions will be
   allocated to forms of LINK_STATUS.  (Other forms of link status are
   already catered to by the introduction, in [RFC7188], of a registry
   for values of the LINK_STATUS TLV.)  Thus the name LINK_STATUS should
   be attached to that specific type extension for that type, i.e., to
   the full type, and not to the TLV type when used with all other type
   extensions therefore.  This was, however, not done as part of the
   initial registration of this TLV type.  Effectively, this leaves, for
   the LINK_STAUS TLV type, the type extensions 1-255 either unavailable
   for allocation (if applying strictly the interpretation that they
   must relate to a LINK_STATUS), or counterintuitively named for their
   intended function.





Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The purpose of this document is to change how names of the second
   form are applied, and recorded in IANA registries, and to provide
   guidelines and instructions for future TLV type allocations.  This is
   to facilitate the addition of new TLVs using type extensions other
   than 0, but without them having inappropriate names attached.  So,
   for example, LINK_STATUS will become the name of the full type (as
   composed by the TLV type 3 and the TLV type extension 0), and will
   cease being the name of the TLV type 3.  This leaves the question of
   how to name the type.  As it is not clear what other TLVs might be
   defined for other type extensions of the same type, it is proposed to
   leave the type currently unnamed, specified only by number.

   This document also updates the Expert Review guidelines from
   [RFC5444], so as to establish a policy for consisteng naming of
   future TLV type and type extension allocations.

   For clarity, all currently allocated TLVs in [RFC5497], [RFC6130],
   [RFC7181] and [RFC7182] will be listed in the IANA considerations
   section of this document, indicating no change when that is
   appropriate (such as the LINK_METRIC TLV).  The only changes are of
   naming.

   Note that nothing in this draft changes the operation of any
   protocol.  This naming is already used, in effect, in [RFC6130] and
   [RFC7181], currently the main users of allocated TLVs.  For example
   the former indicates that all usage of LINK_STATUS refers to that TLV
   with type extension 0.


2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   [RFC2119].

   All references to elements such as packet, message and TLV in this
   document refer to those defined in [RFC5444].













Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


3.  IANA Considerations

   This document updates the Expert Review evaluation guidelines for
   Packet TLV Type, Message TLV Type, and Address Block TLV Type
   allocations, from [RFC5444], and updates the registries for already
   made allocations to follow these guidelines.

3.1.  Expert Review: Evaluation Guidelines

   For registration from the registries for Packet TLV Types, Message
   TLV Types, and Address Block TLV Types, the following guidelines
   apply, in addition to those given in section 6.1 in [RFC5444]:

   o  If the reguested TLV Type immediately defines (but not necessarily
      allocates) all the corresponding type extensions for versions of
      that type, then a common name SHOULD be assigned for the TLV type.

   o  Otherwise, if the reguested TLV Type does not immediately define
      all the corresponding type extensions for versions of that type,
      then a common name SHOULD NOT be assigned for that TLV type.
      Instead, it is RECOMMENDED that:

      *  The "description" for the allocated TLV type be "Defined by
         Type Extension";

      *  For Packet TLV Types, that the Type Extension registry, created
         for the TLV Type, be named "Type XX Packet TLV Type
         Extensions", with XX replaced by the numerical value of the TLV
         Type.

      *  For Message TLV Types, that the Type Extension registry,
         created for the TLV Type, be named "Type XX Message TLV Type
         Extensions", with XX replaced by the numerical value of the TLV
         Type.

      *  For Address Block TLV Types, that the Type Extension registry,
         created for the TLV Type, be named "Type XX Address Block TLV
         Type Extensions", with XX replaced by the numerical value of
         the TLV Type.

      *  That each Type Extension be given a name when allocated.

   Note that the former case is unchanged by this specification, this
   currently includes TLV types named ICV, TIMESTAMP and LINK_METRIC.







Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


3.2.  Updated IANA Registries

   The following changes all apply to the IANA registry "Mobile Ad hoc
   NETwork (MANET) Parameters".  For clarity, registries that are
   unchanged, including those that define all type extensions of a TLV
   type, are listed as unchanged.

   The IANA registry "Packet TLV Types" is unchanged.

   The IANA Registry "ICV Packet TLV Type Extensions" is unchanged.

   The IANA Registry "TIMESTAMP Packet TLV Type Extensions" is
   unchanged.

   The IANA Registry "Message TLV Types" is changed to Table 1.

          +---------+-------------------------------+-----------+
          |   Type  | Description                   | Reference |
          +---------+-------------------------------+-----------+
          |    0    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC5497] |
          |    1    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC5497] |
          |   2-4   | Unassigned                    |           |
          |    5    | ICV                           | [RFC7182] |
          |    6    | TIMESTAMP                     | [RFC7182] |
          |    7    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC7181] |
          |    8    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC7181] |
          |  9-223  | Unassigned                    |           |
          | 224-255 | Reserved for Experimental Use | [RFC5444] |
          +---------+-------------------------------+-----------+

                        Table 1: Message TLV Types




















Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The IANA Registry "INTERVAL_TIME Message TLV Type Extensions" is
   renamed as "Type 0 Message TLV Type Extensions" and changed to
   Table 2.

   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |    Type   |      Name     | Description               | Reference |
   | Extension |               |                           |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |     0     | INTERVAL_TIME | The maximum time before   | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | another message of the    |           |
   |           |               | same type as this message |           |
   |           |               | from the same originator  |           |
   |           |               | should be received        |           |
   |   1-223   |               | Unassigned                |           |
   |  224-255  |               | Reserved for Experimental | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | Use                       |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+

                Table 2: Type 0 Message TLV Type Extensions

   The IANA Registry "VALIDITY_TIME Message TLV Type Extensions" is
   renamed as "Type 1 Message TLV Type Extensions" and changed to
   Table 3.

   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |    Type   |      Name     | Description               | Reference |
   | Extension |               |                           |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |     0     | VALIDITY_TIME | The time from receipt of  | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | the message during which  |           |
   |           |               | the information contained |           |
   |           |               | in the message is to be   |           |
   |           |               | considered valid          |           |
   |   1-223   |               | Unassigned                |           |
   |  224-255  |               | Reserved for Experimental | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | Use                       |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+

                Table 3: Type 1 Message TLV Type Extensions

   The IANA Registry "ICV Message TLV Type Extensions" is unchanged.

   The IANA Registry "TIMESTAMP Message TLV Type Extensions" is
   unchanged.







Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The IANA Registry "MPR_WILLING Message Type Extensions" is renamed as
   "Type 7 Message TLV Type Extensions" and changed to Table 4.

   +-----------+-------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
   |    Type   |     Name    | Description                 | Reference |
   | Extension |             |                             |           |
   +-----------+-------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
   |     0     | MPR_WILLING | Bits 0-3 specify the        | [RFC7181] |
   |           |             | originating router's        |           |
   |           |             | willingness to act as a     |           |
   |           |             | flooding MPR; bits 4-7      |           |
   |           |             | specify the originating     |           |
   |           |             | router's willingness to act |           |
   |           |             | as a routing MPR            |           |
   |   1-223   |             | Unassigned                  |           |
   |  224-255  |             | Reserved for Experimental   | [RFC7181] |
   |           |             | Use                         |           |
   +-----------+-------------+-----------------------------+-----------+

                Table 4: Type 7 Message TLV Type Extensions

   The IANA Registry "CONT_SEQ_NUM Message Type Extensions" is renamed
   as "Type 8 Message TLV Type Extensions" and changed to Table 5.

   +-----------+--------------+----------------------------+-----------+
   |    Type   |     Name     | Description                | Reference |
   | Extension |              |                            |           |
   +-----------+--------------+----------------------------+-----------+
   |     0     | CONT_SEQ_NUM | Specifies a content        | [RFC7181] |
   |           |  (COMPLETE)  | sequence number for this   |           |
   |           |              | complete message           |           |
   |     1     | CONT_SEQ_NUM | Specifies a content        | [RFC7181] |
   |           | (INCOMPLETE) | sequence number for this   |           |
   |           |              | incomplete message         |           |
   |   2-223   |              | Unassigned                 |           |
   |  224-255  |              | Reserved for Experimental  | [RFC7181] |
   |           |              | Use                        |           |
   +-----------+--------------+----------------------------+-----------+

                Table 5: Type 8 Message TLV Type Extensions











Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The IANA Registry "Address Block TLV Types" is changed to Table 6.

          +---------+-------------------------------+-----------+
          |   Type  | Description                   | Reference |
          +---------+-------------------------------+-----------+
          |    0    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC5497] |
          |    1    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC5497] |
          |    2    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC6130] |
          |    3    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC6130] |
          |    4    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC6130] |
          |    5    | ICV                           | [RFC7182] |
          |    6    | TIMESTAMP                     | [RFC7182] |
          |    7    | LINK_METRIC                   | [RFC7181] |
          |    8    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC7181] |
          |    9    | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC7181] |
          |    10   | Defined by Type Extension     | [RFC7181] |
          |  11-223 | Unassigned                    |           |
          | 224-255 | Reserved for Experimental Use | [RFC5444] |
          +---------+-------------------------------+-----------+

                     Table 6: Address Block TLV Types

   The IANA Registry "INTERVAL_TIME Address Block TLV Type Extensions"
   is renamed as "Type 0 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed
   to Table 7.

   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |    Type   |      Name     | Description               | Reference |
   | Extension |               |                           |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |     0     | INTERVAL_TIME | The maximum time before   | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | another message of the    |           |
   |           |               | same type as this message |           |
   |           |               | from the same originator  |           |
   |           |               | and containing this       |           |
   |           |               | address should be         |           |
   |           |               | received                  |           |
   |   1-223   |               | Unassigned                |           |
   |  224-255  |               | Reserved for Experimental | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | Use                       |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+

             Table 7: Type 0 Address Block TLV Type Extensions








Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The IANA Registry "VALIDITY_TIME Address Block Type Extensions" is
   renamed as "Type 1 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed to
   Table 8.

   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |    Type   |      Name     | Description               | Reference |
   | Extension |               |                           |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+
   |     0     | VALIDITY_TIME | The time from receipt of  | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | the address during which  |           |
   |           |               | the information regarding |           |
   |           |               | this address is to be     |           |
   |           |               | considered valid          |           |
   |   1-223   |               | Unassigned                |           |
   |  224-255  |               | Reserved for Experimental | [RFC5497] |
   |           |               | Use                       |           |
   +-----------+---------------+---------------------------+-----------+

             Table 8: Type 1 Address Block TLV Type Extensions

   The IANA Registry "LOCAL_IF Address Block Type Extensions" is renamed
   as "Type 2 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed to Table 9.

   +-----------+----------+-----------------------+--------------------+
   |    Type   |   Name   | Description           | Reference          |
   | Extension |          |                       |                    |
   +-----------+----------+-----------------------+--------------------+
   |     0     | LOCAL_IF | This value is to be   | [RFC7188][RFC6130] |
   |           |          | interpreted according |                    |
   |           |          | to the registry       |                    |
   |           |          | [LOCAL_IF TLV Values] |                    |
   |   1-223   |          | Unassigned            |                    |
   |  224-255  |          | Reserved for          | [RFC6130]          |
   |           |          | Experimental Use      |                    |
   +-----------+----------+-----------------------+--------------------+

             Table 9: Type 2 Address Block TLV Type Extensions














Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The IANA Registry "LINK_STATUS Address Block Type Extensions" is
   renamed as "Type 3 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed to
   Table 10.

   +-----------+-------------+--------------------+--------------------+
   |    Type   |     Name    | Description        | Reference          |
   | Extension |             |                    |                    |
   +-----------+-------------+--------------------+--------------------+
   |     0     | LINK_STATUS | This value is to   | [RFC7188][RFC6130] |
   |           |             | be interpreted     |                    |
   |           |             | according to the   |                    |
   |           |             | registry           |                    |
   |           |             | [LINK_STATUS TLV   |                    |
   |           |             | Values]            |                    |
   |   1-223   |             | Unassigned         |                    |
   |  224-255  |             | Reserved for       | [RFC6130]          |
   |           |             | Experimental Use   |                    |
   +-----------+-------------+--------------------+--------------------+

            Table 10: Type 3 Address Block TLV Type Extensions

   The IANA Registry "OTHER_NEIGHB Address Block Type Extensions" is
   renamed as "Type 4 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed to
   Table 11.

   +-----------+--------------+-------------------+--------------------+
   |    Type   |     Name     | Description       | Reference          |
   | Extension |              |                   |                    |
   +-----------+--------------+-------------------+--------------------+
   |     0     | OTHER_NEIGHB | This value is to  | [RFC7188][RFC6130] |
   |           |              | be interpreted    |                    |
   |           |              | according to the  |                    |
   |           |              | registry          |                    |
   |           |              | [OTHER_NEIGHB TLV |                    |
   |           |              | Values]           |                    |
   |   1-223   |              | Unassigned        |                    |
   |  224-255  |              | Reserved for      | [RFC6130]          |
   |           |              | Experimental Use  |                    |
   +-----------+--------------+-------------------+--------------------+

            Table 11: Type 4 Address Block TLV Type Extensions

   The IANA Registry "ICV Address Block TLV Type Extensions" is
   unchanged.

   The IANA Registry "TIMESTAMP Address Block TLV Type Extensions" is
   unchanged.




Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The IANA Registry "LINK_METRIC Address Block TLV Type Extensions" is
   unchanged.

   The IANA Registry "MPR Address Block Type Extensions" is renamed as
   "Type 8 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed to Table 12.

   +-----------+------+---------------------------+--------------------+
   |    Type   | Name | Description               | Reference          |
   | Extension |      |                           |                    |
   +-----------+------+---------------------------+--------------------+
   |     0     |  MPR | This value is to be       | [RFC7188][RFC7181] |
   |           |      | interpreted according to  |                    |
   |           |      | the registry [MPR TLV Bit |                    |
   |           |      | Values]                   |                    |
   |   1-223   |      | Unassigned                |                    |
   |  224-255  |      | Reserved for Experimental | This Document      |
   |           |      | Use                       |                    |
   +-----------+------+---------------------------+--------------------+

            Table 12: Type 8 Address Block TLV Type Extensions

   The IANA Registry "NBR_ADDR_TYPES Address Block Type Extensions" is
   renamed as "Type 9 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed to
   Table 13.

   +-----------+----------------+-----------------+--------------------+
   |    Type   |      Name      | Description     | Reference          |
   | Extension |                |                 |                    |
   +-----------+----------------+-----------------+--------------------+
   |     0     | NBR_ADDR_TYPES | This value is   | [RFC7188][RFC7181] |
   |           |                | to be           |                    |
   |           |                | interpreted     |                    |
   |           |                | according to    |                    |
   |           |                | the registry    |                    |
   |           |                | [NBR_ADDR_TYPE  |                    |
   |           |                | Address Block   |                    |
   |           |                | TLV Bit Values] |                    |
   |   1-223   |                | Unassigned      |                    |
   |  224-255  |                | Reserved for    | This Document      |
   |           |                | Experimental    |                    |
   |           |                | Use             |                    |
   +-----------+----------------+-----------------+--------------------+

            Table 13: Type 9 Address Block TLV Type Extensions







Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   The IANA Registry "GATEWAY Address Block Type Extensions" is renamed
   as "Type 10 Address Block TLV Type Extensions" and changed to
   Table 14.

   +-----------+---------+------------------------+--------------------+
   |    Type   |   Name  | Description            | Reference          |
   | Extension |         |                        |                    |
   +-----------+---------+------------------------+--------------------+
   |     0     | GATEWAY | Specifies that a given | [RFC7188][RFC7181] |
   |           |         | network address is     |                    |
   |           |         | reached via a gateway  |                    |
   |           |         | on the originating     |                    |
   |           |         | router, with value     |                    |
   |           |         | equal to the number of |                    |
   |           |         | hops                   |                    |
   |   1-223   |         | Unassigned             |                    |
   |  224-255  |         | Reserved for           | This Document      |
   |           |         | Experimental Use       |                    |
   +-----------+---------+------------------------+--------------------+

            Table 14: Type 10 Address Block TLV Type Extensions

   Note: This document adds reservations for experimental use, omitted
   in [RFC7181], to the last three tables.


4.  Security Considerations

   As this document is concerned only with how entities are named, those
   names being used only in documents such as this and IANA registries,
   this document has no security considerations.


5.  Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel for having pointed out
   the need for reorganization and rationalization the naming of TLVs
   (type-length-value structures), defined by [RFC5444].













Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


6.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC5444]  Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Dean, J., and C. Adjih,
              "Generalized MANET Packet/Message Format", RFC 5444,
              February 2009.

   [RFC5497]  Clausen, T. and C. Dearlove, "Representing Multi-Value
              Time in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs)", RFC 5497,
              March 2009.

   [RFC6130]  Clausen, T., Dean, J., and C. Dearlove, "Mobile Ad Hoc
              Network (MANET) Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)",
              RFC 6130, April 2011.

   [RFC7181]  Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Jacquet, P., and U. Herberg,
              "The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2",
              RFC 7181, April 2014.

   [RFC7182]  Herberg, U., Clausen, T., and C. Dearlove, "Integrity
              Check Value and Timestamp TLV Definitions for Mobile Ad
              Hoc Networks (MANETs)", RFC 7182, April 2014.

   [RFC7188]  Dearlove, C. and T. Clausen, "Optimized Link State Routing
              Protocol version 2 (OLSRv2) and MANET Neighborhood
              Discovery Protocol (NHDP) Extension TLVs", RFC 7188,
              April 2014.


Authors' Addresses

   Christopher Dearlove
   BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
   West Hanningfield Road
   Great Baddow, Chelmsford
   United Kingdom

   Phone: +44 1245 242194
   Email: chris.dearlove@baesystems.com
   URI:   http://www.baesystems.com/









Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015               [Page 15]


Internet-Draft                 TLV Naming                       May 2015


   Thomas Heide Clausen
   LIX, Ecole Polytechnique

   Phone: +33 6 6058 9349
   Email: T.Clausen@computer.org
   URI:   http://www.ThomasClausen.org/













































Dearlove & Clausen      Expires November 8, 2015               [Page 16]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/