[Int-dir] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum-04

Sheng Jiang via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 20 October 2020 03:22 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: int-dir@ietf.org
Delivered-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C4523A1093; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 20:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sheng Jiang via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <int-dir@ietf.org>
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, v6ops@ietf.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.20.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <160316412121.27287.5712211736911612350@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 20:22:01 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/NsLsegzrsWmThW0Fv-qS7DPC1XE>
Subject: [Int-dir] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum-04
X-BeenThere: int-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "This list is for discussion between the members of the Internet Area directorate." <int-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 03:22:01 -0000

Reviewer: Sheng Jiang
Review result: Ready

Reviewer: Sheng Jiang
Review result: Ready


I have reviewed this document as part of the Internet Area directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written with the intent of improving the IETF drafts.

Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews
during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these
comments just like any other last call comments.


Overall Summary:

This draft is a document that intents to be an Informational  RFC. This
document document the issue scenario that IPv6 prefixes becomes invalid without
any explicit signaling and nodes still use stale addresses, and gives
recommendations to improve the network operation.

Overall this is a well written document. It is Ready for publish.