[v6ops] Re: link-v6ops-6mops

[Jen Linkova <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 5:41 AM Michael Richardson
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> (I can't help reading "6mops" as having something to do with Muppets)

Working as intended ;)

> I read draft-link-v6ops-6mops yesterday after listening to Jen Linkova's
> RIPE88 presentation.  I find that the document seems to repeat a lot of
> rfc8925, but I guess maybe this document is more operations oriented in it's
> explanations.

Yes, it is.

I hadn't even considered writing anything like that, thinking "it's
obvious, everything you know to deploy IPv6-mosly is in RFC8925 and
and RFC8781".
However, feedback to my 'Mission Possible" presentation at IETF118 was
'please write it down'.
So yes, the key elements and the motivation for IPv6-mostly are
already documented in other RFCs.
But I think this draft needs to explain the motivation once again, as
otherwise it would be rather confusing.

If you think that some paragraphs/sections duplicate RFC8925 too much,
please let me know, I'm happy to delete/rephrase some text.

> There is a lot of really good advice in this document.
> Aside from lack of Security Considerations, I think the document is
> excellent.

Thank you! -01 which has just been posted, has much more text in the
Security Considerations section.

>I would suggest adopting it and then completing the SC.

Sounds like a plan ;))

-- 
Cheers, Jen Linkova