Re: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64-08: (with COMMENT)
Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Tue, 17 December 2019 17:55 UTC
Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EAD812086B; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:55:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.401
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uWfqAe3J-Ivc; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:55:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-f179.google.com (mail-il1-f179.google.com [209.85.166.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AE60120C9E; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:55:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-f179.google.com with SMTP id s15so6029933iln.1; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:55:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Fy6wK5xc049Jn83lTlUQeuOrx+ndxVO4XzEKli/N4Yo=; b=PKbAdsfnI+BNrnmwhri7E/uCL40gsJoEhiGvCfQs4zxj4SOHlRq+bASqYp8Lb+EuDl eES89Cf5HFpNfWWk1N299VhWT8pw81BPfYRSuJ/8LTGl7PJj7KoE5GmUwqe5dSHMwR9B 4yN3bm067PylB5OO2qVdKxkjlpEXoReaHy3YCuFd9vprPb6oXPEzypVlgAnUhKgQtu/I Qb04lIBTMg7zoND7E++fxgtfFZvR55KwhdgctBnmpv5Fli9dOmdSxq1eSPlvddjJkviy sQDtSg/MpTWVJF9RhTHHyyzlVh26ai8UpCCs4BObD7eOLxtVEC+M6oknxhgzpTYRlZou n0Cw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU9IvQ5o0mSt7uA+7vqvWjzPOuaH74Lta+SDP0MrYK0WLELgIyD gRhlrl+/m9ciWMbUv4hTaqDXpWUaivub9/zINPI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxfGEOvJRaq4Om7Vjbc4QfL8AvrZJI3awqmkV3RRcXcS4ceCsIHh78EgcCJlPGmBUE1UOL5XrmzxP2Ig7wulHw=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:d3cc:: with SMTP id c12mr7433900ilh.266.1576605314331; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 09:55:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <157655824890.24496.6907121559908698996.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAFU7BARUBnaZ2VxH50TwEzMXdK1SUQC+Pni9pV8J9jdXbrQY4Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BARUBnaZ2VxH50TwEzMXdK1SUQC+Pni9pV8J9jdXbrQY4Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 12:55:03 -0500
Message-ID: <CALaySJKn+BbBYJYhdXBEsQuc4s5iGq3oTB8H0bxghJVmAGyZWg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64-08: (with COMMENT)
To: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/jxhMQRQji3DBJR_TB0ztY1zl-5A>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 17:55:19 -0000
Hi, Jen. > > What does “more specifics” mean here? I don’t understand the sentence. > > "more specific" as "more specific route". > Would the following sentence be more readable: > > " If the network operator desires to route different parts of the IPv4 > address space to different NAT64 devices, this can be accomplished by > routing more specific routes comprising the NAT64 prefix to those > devices." > ? Yes... that, I understand. Thanks! Barry
- Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-ra-… Barry Leiba via Datatracker
- Re: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man… Jen Linkova
- Re: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man… Barry Leiba