[MBONED] draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-04

[<[e-mail]>]

Dear all,

We submitted a new version of the draft to take into account the comments received so far. 
The main changes are as follows:

   o  Indicate the draft update RFC3306 as suggested by T. Chown.  We
      didn't added a note about rfc3956 as we are defining a bit
      reserved in 3306.

   o  Because of the previous comment, the wording has been changed to
      indicate we are reserving a bit in the unicast prefix-based
      address not reserving a prefix for ASM.  The rationale behind that
      is to encourage implementations check the value of the
      reserved bit rather than matching a prefix.

   o  Clarify the meaning of "x" as requested by Behcet.

   o  Behcet asked to reserve a /17 or /12 for ASM.  We didn't considered
      that comment because we received in the past comments arguing that
      reserving /17 is a waste of multicast address space.  This is
      documented in Section 3.1 of the draft.

   o  Implemented some wording changes suggested by P. Koch.

   o  Update the section with examples.


A detailed diff is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mboned-64-multicast-address-format-04.


If you still have a concern with the new version, please discuss it in the list.

Cheers,
Med