Re: AD review of draft-ietf-6man-reserved-iids

Hi Jari,
   Thanks for your comments. I agree with all of them. I will submit a 
revised version after the last call completes.

Cheers
Suresh

Jari Arkko wrote:
> I have reviewed this specification. It is basically in good shape, 
> though there were a few annoying editorial bugs that I would ask to be 
> fixed if it weren't for the I-D submissions block at this time. Given 
> this, I have sent the draft forward for IETF Last Call.
> 
>> e.g.  An IPv6 node ...
> For instance, an IPv6 node ...
> 
> 
>> address sutoconfiguration standards
> 
> I must have missed these standards, unless, of course, you mean the 
> address autoconfiguration standards :-)
> 
>> PMIP
> 
> Previously unknown abbreviation introduced here.
> 
> But I would just take the entire PMIP example out, it appears to be more 
> confusing than helpful, and I believe the downref issue already is 
> clear. Does PMIP even allocate such addresses? I thought not.
> 
>> e.g. Reserving certain identifiers 
> Same as above -- I'm not actually sure if this is proper English.
> 
> Jari
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------