[Gen-art] Genart review: draft-ietf-6man-reserved-iids-01

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-6man-reserved-iids-01
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date:  01 Dec 2008
IESG Telechat date: 04 Dec 2008

Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication. I have a  
couple of questions below.

Major issues: none

Minor issues:

The last sentence of section 3 seems to put a (new?) normative  
restriction on the behavior of protocols (like dhcpv6) defined in  
other documents. Should this document call out what it's updating?

Nits/editorial comments:

Nit - I'm probably missing a point in the "Possible solutions" section  
- as I read it, it is attempting to justify using a registry instead  
of asking documents to explicitly point to the two RFCs it calls out  
as defining reserved IID ranges because the number of specifications  
to be updated would be large (the sentence here has a grammar problem  
that I'll send directly to the editor). Why would these same documents  
not need to be updated to point to the registry? (I'm not disagreeing  
with the registry - I just don't understand what is being argued in  
this part of the section.)

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art