Re: [Int-area] WGLC for draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis-04

Hi Bob,

OK, I'll make the changes with your further suggestions.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 11:42 PM Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:

> Donald,
>
> On May 9, 2023, at 6:37 PM, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 11:29 AM Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I generally support advancing this document, but I noticed an issue that
> should be resolved.
> >
> > In Section 2.2.1. "IPv6 Use of Modified EUI‑64 Identifiers”.    The
> contents is technically correct, but it should also mention that this type
> of IPv6 Interface Identifiers are no longer recommended.   See RFC8064
> "Recommendation on Stable IPv6 Interface Identifiers”.   I think it would
> be better if text was added at the beginning of Section 2.2.1 that this
> approach is no longer recommended, include a reference to RFC8064, and say
> something that this is included for completeness (or similar wording).
>
> Thanks for this cogent comment.
>
> How about adding the following sentence as a new first paragraph in
> Section 2.2.1: "The approach described below for constructing IPv6 is now
> deprecated and the method specified in [RFC8064] is RECOMMENDED."
>
>
> Yes, that is good.  Suggest s/constructing IPv6/constructing IPv6
> Interface Identifiers/
>
>
> Also changing the beginning of the following text as follows
> OLD
>
> UI‑64 identifiers are used to form the lower 64 bits of some
>
> NEW
>
> UI‑64 identifiers have been used to form the lower 64 bits of some
>
>
> Good.  Similar change in Section 2.2 would also be good.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Donald
> ===============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
>  d3e3e3@gmail.com
>
> Thanks,
> Donald
> ===============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
>  d3e3e3@gmail.com
>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 11:29 AM Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I generally support advancing this document, but I noticed an issue that
>> should be resolved.
>>
>> In Section 2.2.1. "IPv6 Use of Modified EUI‑64 Identifiers”.    The
>> contents is technically correct, but it should also mention that this type
>> of IPv6 Interface Identifiers are no longer recommended.   See RFC8064
>> "Recommendation on Stable IPv6 Interface Identifiers”.   I think it would
>> be better if text was added at the beginning of Section 2.2.1 that this
>> approach is no longer recommended, include a reference to RFC8064, and say
>> something that this is included for completeness (or similar wording).
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>> On May 4, 2023, at 11:17 PM, Wassim Haddad <
>> wassim.haddad=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Intarea WG,
>>
>> This email starts an Intarea WG Last Call on
>> draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis-04 (“IANA Considerations and IETF Protocol
>> and Documentation Usage for IEEE 802 Parameters”).
>>
>> A link to the draft:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-rfc7042bis/
>>
>> Please respond to this email to support the documents and/or send
>> comments by 05/20/2023.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Juan Carlos & Wassim
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> Int-area@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> Int-area@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>>
>
>