Re: Revised doc: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-ops-05.txt

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

Hi,

On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>   5.107 RFC 3084 COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)
> 
>   This specification builds on RFC 2748, and is both IPv4
>   and IPv6 capable.  The specification defines a sample filter in
>   section 4.3, which has "ipv4" in it; however, it's just an example,
>   and available to IPv6 as well with a simple replacement of "ipv4"
>   with "ipv6".
> 
> The last sentence is NOT true. And it is not needed. The fact that
> the document just uses an IPv4 sexample is fine. We do not need
> top try and explain what needs to be done for an IPv6 or an IP evrsion
> neutral example. That is more than what you suggest. I can deal with it
> with an RFC-Editor note as follows:
[...]

The (new) text just tried to explain to a casual reader that while the
document has "ipv4" on it, it's just fine.

But the suggested RFC Editor note seems OK -- let's do it that way.

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