[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-renumbering-procedure-05.txt

My compatriots may disagree with me; I am answering for myself.

On Sep 15, 2005, at 11:56 AM, RFC Editor wrote:

Authors,

While checking the references within
<draft-ietf-v6ops-renumbering-procedure-05.txt>, we noticed a
reference to RFC 2535.  However, RFC 2535 has been obsoleted by RFCs
4033, 4034, and 4035.  Is it appropriate to replace instances of
[RFC2535] with [RFC4033][RFC4034][RFC4035]?

Yes, I should think so. Those RFCs were published after the renumbering document had entered the RFC Editor's queue and escaped our notice.

We also have a few other questions.


1) Would you object to our changing the following:

   It may be considered an update to [RFC2072].

To:

This document updates [RFC2072]. 

That works for me

2) We have changed the following:

   Use of StateLess Address Configuration [RFC2462] (SLAC)...

To:

   Use of StateLess Address Autoconfiguration (SLAC) [RFC2462]...

This seemed to be consistent with the title of RFC 2462 and with the
SLAC definition in section 1.2.  Please let us know if this is
incorrect.


That works for me

3) Could you please clarify the following text:

   A special consideration applies when some devices are only
   occasionally used; the administration must allow sufficiently long
   in Section 2.6 to ensure that their likelihood of detection is
   sufficiently high.

Must allow a sufficient length of time? 

Yes, the text

   A special consideration applies when some devices are only
   occasionally used; the administration must allow a sufficient
   length of time in Section 2.6 to ensure that their likelihood
   of detection is sufficiently high.

conveys the intended meaning. That said, it might be worthwhile to instead say

   A special consideration applies when some devices are only
   occasionally used; the administration must allow a sufficient
   length of time in Section 2.6 or apply other verification
   procedures to ensure that their likelihood of detection is
   sufficiently high.