Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines-12.txt

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

Thank you Suresh for these comments. I have addressed all of them in -14.

Jari

Suresh Krishnan kirjoitti:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
> draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines-12.txt
>
> For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
> <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive.
>
> Summary: This draft is well written and is ready for publication as an 
> Informational RFC but has some minor issues that need to be fixed.
>
> Minor
> =====
>
> * Section 2
>
> NAT-PT was defined in RFC2766 and not in RFC4966 (which deprecated it).
>
> Suggest replacing
>
> NAT-PT:  refers to a specific, old design of a Network Address
> Translator - Protocol Translator defined in [RFC4966].
>
> with
>
> NAT-PT:  refers to a specific, old design of a Network Address
> Translator - Protocol Translator defined in [RFC2766] and
> deprecated due to the reasons stated in [RFC4966].
>
>
> * Section 3.1
>
> "  For instance, a service provider network might stop providing IPv4
>    service within its own network, while still allowing its IPv6
>    customers to access the rest of the IPv4 Internet through overlay or
>    proxy services."
>
> IPv6-IPv4 translation could also be used as a sunsetting mechanism. 
> Could you include this as an option. e.g.
>
> "  For instance, a service provider network might stop providing IPv4
>    service within its own network, while still allowing its IPv6
>    customers to access the rest of the IPv4 Internet through overlay,
>    proxy, or translation services."
>
> Thanks
> Suresh
>