[IPv6]Re: Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-6man-zone-ui

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Martin, we'll handle your comments after the Last Call ends.

As for the "Updates: 4007", it's a shame there is no "Extends: 4007"
option, but in my personal opinion, it seems reasonable.

Regards
    Brian Carpenter

On 30-Sep-24 20:50, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> On 2024-09-26 02:32, David Schinazi wrote:
>> I've followed this draft through its history, and just read through the
>> latest version. I support publication.
>> David
> 
> Same here. Like David, I also have been involved in trying to find a
> solution to the problem, although that was quite some time ago (see
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fenner-literal-zone/)
> 
> I'm also happy to see this problem come to a conclusion after so many
> years, although it's probably not the conclusion we imagined at the start.
> 
> 
> Looking at
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-6man-zone-ui-03.html in detail:
> 
> 
> On the open issue, unless this has already been settled, I'd be in favor
> of formally updating RFC 4007. That makes it easier for implementers to
> follow the breadcrumbs.
> 
> 
> While I'm at it, a few suggestions for textual improvement (I'm
> perfectly okay even if none of these get taken up):
> 
> 
> Section 1: I'm not happy about the fact that the Introduction is longer
> than all the rest of the document (including sections 2 and 5, which are
> only boilerplate). It's probably too late, but ideally, lots of Section
> 1 would be moved back to a new section entitled "Use Cases" or some such.
> 
> 
> Section 3: In the sentences "If this is impossible for practical
> reasons, the UI could support an alternative delimiter in place of "%"."
> and "If this too is impossible for practical reasons, the UI could
> support two separate input fields...", I'm not sure about the 'could'.
> 
> It's somewhat confusing that we say SHOULD at the start but then only
> 'could' later. It may make sense if we use 'could' for a number of
> equally advisable alternatives, but we have a strictly prioritized list.
> 
> So I'd either stay with the current prioritized list but use at least
> 'should' and maybe even 'SHOULD' (and at the end of the list, add
> something like "If all of the above is impossible, use some other way to
> make it possible for the user to enter or select the desired zone
> identifier."), or convert to describing the alternatives as equally
> advisable and leave the 'could' (or better change to a 'can').
> 
> 
> Section 4, "As explained in [RFC4007], zone identifiers are of local
> significance and must not be sent on the wire.": I'd add *only* to make
> things even clearer, resulting in "As explained in [RFC4007], zone
> identifiers are of local significance only and must not be sent on the
> wire."
> 
> 
> Section 4, "For example, a limit to 16 ASCII characters would correspond
> to the existing limit on Linux interface names.": Besides what has
> already been discussed, I'd change "a limit to" to "a limit of". English
> is neither my mother tongue, nor do I know formal English grammar, but
> I'd say that while the very 'limit' goes together with the preposition
> 'to' (to limit something to something), nouns don't take specific
> prepositions.
> 
> 
> Regards,   Martin.
> 
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 2:10 PM Jen Linkova <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> This message starts a new 6MAN Working Group Last Call on
>>>    the "Entering IPv6 Zone Identifiers in User Interfaces" document
>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-zone-ui/)
>>>
>>> Substantive comments and statements of support for publishing this
>>> document should be directed to the [e-mail] mailing list.
>>>
>>> Editorial suggestions can be sent to the authors.  This last call will
>>> end on Fri Oct 11 2024, 23:59:59 UTC.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers, Jen Linkova (with her 6MAN chair hat on)
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> List Info: https://mailman3.ietf.org/mailman3/lists/[e-mail]/
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> List Info: https://mailman3.ietf.org/mailman3/lists/[e-mail]/
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>