On Jul 20, 2017, at 9:23 PM, Naiming Shen (naiming) <naiming@cisco.com> wrote:

Hi Ralf,

Thanks for your review of this document. Your
suggestion makes lot of sense.
Iā€™m going to add the below sentence in the section 4:

ā€œ.., to allow the stateless operation in a relay chain, ā€¦ā€

to make the motivation clear for this dhcpv6 relay option.

the rfcdiff file is attached.

- Naiming


On Jul 20, 2017, at 5:08 AM, Ralf Weber <ralf.weber@nominum.com> wrote:

Reviewer: Ralf Weber
Review result: Ready with Nits


I reviewed this document and I'm good with it. The only minor purely cosmetic
note is that it took me some time to understand why you record the port for the
IPv6 relay chain. According to a discussion I had with Bernie that is to be
able to have the agent stateless. Maybe add that to the motivation why you
store it in the packet at the end of section 4 (, to allow stateless operation
in a relay chain)

So long