[6lo] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-6lo-prefix-registration-02

[Dave Thaler via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Reviewer: Dave Thaler
Review result: On the Right Track

A PDF with my comments inline is on my OneDrive share at:
https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=DC2B364F3F06FEA8&id=DC2B364F3F06FEA8%21522413&parId=DC2B364F3F06FEA8%21522414&o=OneUp

Summary:
* Overall the document is well written and readable
* Section 2.3 has a nice list of acronyms but many acronyms are in the document
that are not listed in that section * Many typos and grammatical errors exist,
as noted throughout my marked up copy * It is unclear whether a prefix can be a
multicast prefix or not. For example, in Table 1 in the discussion of updating
RFC 8505, the table has separate values for unicast, anycast, and multicast,
but only one value for prefix. * There are a number of uses of "should" that
would be better as "SHOULD" or "MUST" depending on the intent. * Section 7.3's
use of a 112 bit prefix is confusing given that the field length is 120 bits
not 112 bits.  Where does the number 112 come from? * Section 7.4 talks about
the case where "it determined that the 6LBR is legacy and does not support this
specification" but it does not explain how a 6LR can determine this. 
Elaborate. * draft-ietf-6lo-multicast-registration is used normatively so
should be a Normative, not Informative, reference