Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64-08: (with COMMENT)
Barry Leiba via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 17 December 2019 04:50 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E02B6120098; Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:50:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64@ietf.org, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, 6man-chairs@ietf.org, bob.hinden@gmail.com, ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64-08: (with COMMENT)
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.113.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Message-ID: <157655824890.24496.6907121559908698996.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 20:50:48 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/yM7NziK-JbPE3zD79sqx57C0Jjs>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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 04:50:49 -0000
Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64-08: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-ra-pref64/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I just have a couple of editorial comments about Section 4: 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 specifics of the NAT64 prefix to those devices. What does “more specifics” mean here? I don’t understand the sentence. For example, if the operator is using the RFC1918 address space, e.g. 10.0.0.0/8 internally and would like to route 10.0.0.0/8 through NAT64 device A and the rest of the IPv4 space through NAT64 device B, and the operator's NAT64 prefix is 2001:db8:a:b::/96, then the operator can route 2001:db8:a:b::a00:0/104 to NAT64 A and 2001:db8:a:b::/96 to NAT64 B. This sentence is too long and cumbersome, and would benefit from being split (which would also fix some awkward missing commas). How’s this?: NEW For example, suppose an operator is using the RFC1918 address space 10.0.0.0/8 internally. That operator might want to route 10.0.0.0/8 through NAT64 device A, and the rest of the IPv4 space through NAT64 device B. If the operator's NAT64 prefix is 2001:db8:a:b::/96, then the operator can route 2001:db8:a:b::a00:0/104 to NAT64 A and 2001:db8:a:b::/96 to NAT64 B. END
- 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