Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-02.txt

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

I still object to the out-of-scope material in sections 1.1 and 1.2 
(previously 1.3). There is less irrelevance than before, but surely this 
document is not the place for editorializing.

   Brian

> Subject: Re: WG Last Call: a batch of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-*01 documents
> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 16:19:21 +0200
> From: Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>
> Organization: IBM
> To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This is important work and IMHO it's almost ready to ship.
> 
> 1. draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-01.txt
> 
> Section 1.1 is too editorial, and section 1.2 is irrelevant.
> I would simply delete them. If a historical reference is wanted,
> use RFC 1752.
> 
> The second and third paragraphs of Section 1.3 are also irrelevant,
> and should be removed, and tossed over the fence to the Problem WG.
> [I happen to agree with these paragraphs, but they don't belong here.]
>