Hi, A few comments:Second 2, bullet #2, 3rd line reads: "Otherwise, it may required a new". Should possibly read "Otherwise, it may require a new...."
In the sentence that reads "However, it can be more costly in both capital expends ", did you mean "capital expenses"?
Section 3.4, the statement, "should also applies", should read "should also apply".
In the security section is it worth mentioning a stance on filtering type 0 routing headers at this critical place in the Internet?
Kind regards, Truman Boyes On 10/12/2008, at 3:35 PM, Roque Gagliano wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dear Friends,working in another project I wrote a document about options for implementing IPv6 in an IXP. I submit this information as an Internet Draft and I wanted to get feedback from this working group.Draft:http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rgaglian-v6ops- v6inixp-00.txtregards, Roque Gagliano LACNIC -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAklAKAkACgkQnk+WSgHpbO4MWQCfWLgdjkfDFRZ04jRF6RDP5bCi 8UEAn1LLpT74/LEtIbzgVgTRCSnoOUEq =y/cx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----