[art] Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6146-bis-10 telechat Artart review

[John R Levine <[e-mail]>]

> The one you’re suggesting is very close to the one I’ve prepared, 
> however Med suggested avoiding such changes as it was well understood in 
> the original RFC6146:

> +--------------+                  +--------------+
> |  IPv6-only   |                  |  IPv4-only   |
> |   network    |    +--------+    |   network    |
> |              |    | DNS +  |    |              |
> |              |  --| DNS64  |--  |    +----+    |
> |    +----+    |  | +--------+ |  |    | H2 |    |
> |    | H1 |    |--|            |--|    +----+    |
> |    +----+    |  | +--------+ |  |  192.0.2.1   |
> | 2001:db8::1  |  --|stateful|--  |              |
> |              |    | NAT64  |    |              |
> |              |    +--------+    |              |
> +--------------+                  +--------------+

That figure would be fine.  It's much better than the one in 6146.

R's,
John

>>>> Overall: Still ready with Issues
>>>>
>>>> In the previous review I called out two issues, the confusing
>>>> Figure one, and the lack of DNSSEC concerns in the security
>>>> section.  The second issue is fixed with a short addition, the
>>>> first unfortunately is not.
>>>>
>>>> While the authors removed a few line segments from Figure 1, it
>>>> doesn't help since all of the same issues remain. Rather than
>>>> trying to tweak it, the authors could start over on a piece of
>>>> paper with a sketch of the actual topology, then transcribe it
>>>> preferably into SVG or if need be ASCII art.
>>>>