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

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

Hi,

On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 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.

It seems the second part of your comment was not implemented.

I agree that those two paragraphs should be removed.

Andreas, please do that and resubmit at the end of this week unless other 
comments come up.

Thanks for persistence,
 Pekka
 (speaking as co-chair)

> > 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 If a historical reference is wanted,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.]
> >
> 

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings