[v6ops] comments on draft-xiao-v6ops-nd-deployment-guidelines

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

XiPeng, Some editorial comments/questions first.
Are you using kramdown and/or xml format?  Or doing something with a Word macro?
I strongly recommend using kramdown format,
   https://www.ietf.org/live/previous/live104/ietf104-create-i-d-tutorial/
because then you upload XMLv3, and you get much more beautiful and readable
HTML.

What made me notice this is that "OPSECv27" reference is not linked,
and that document is now RFC9099.

I don't want to go through the document word for work.
I think that this is premature.  I think that the goals of the document are
clear, but I think that some restructuring is in order to meet the needs of
what I think are the intended readers.  I think that intended readers are a
variety of different operators.
A secondary list of readers are product managers at L2/L3 switch vendors.

The operator would say, "I'm deploying IPv6 in my XXX network using RFFyyyy,
method 4".  The vendor would say, "oh yes. wonderful. We support that, and
you want to read section zzz of our manual"

Section 2 has a lot of information, and is close, but not quite, a tutorial
on each mechanism. Perhaps that belongs in a series of appendixes.
I think that the better approach is to have a section two ask questions
(i.e. a self-assessment) as to what kind of scenario they want to do.
Some of the results might be aspirational vs actual.
As in, "I really want to get to UPPH support, but not all my hosts are
capable yet, so until then, I want MLSN"

I suggest that section 3 then more about characteristics of each solution,
and how each solution accomplishes the different goals.  The text there is
good, but I think it should come in a different order.

The Security Considerations will need to do a lot more.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-