[v6ops] My review results: a few nits -- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment-05.txt

[Gabor LENCSE <[e-mail]>]

Dear All,

I have read the draft. (Only its main text, not the appendices.)

I feel that it is quite comprehensive, it covers a lot of aspects of 
IPv6 deployment and provides a good overview.

I have not found any significant issue, but only nits (see below). 
Perhaps a WGLC may follow.

Best regards,

Gábor

------------------ Nits ------------------

I was taking notes during reading. The majority of them are technical. 
For some reason unknown to me, some references did not became links in 
the htmlized version.

Section 2.3.

[W3Tech]

Section 3.1.

[APNIC2]

Section 3.3

[NST_1] -- should be a link
[BGR_1]  -- should be a link
[CNLABS_1] -- should be a link

Typo:
IPv6-enablesd --> IPv6-enabled

Grammar:
A poll ... show --> A poll ... shows

Section 3.3.1

DSN --> DNS

Section  4.2

[I-D.ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison] -- should be a link

    While it cannot be always the case, IPv6-only transition technologies
    such as 464XLAT require much less IPv4 public addresses
    [I-D.ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment#ref-I-D.ietf-v6ops-transition-comparison>], because they make a more
    efficient usage without restricting the number of ports per
    subscriber._This_  contributes to reduce troubleshooting costs and to
    remove some operational issues related to permanent black-listing of
    IPv4 address blocks when used via CGN in some services.  For example,
    Sony Play Station Network or OpenDNS imply a higher rotation of IPv4
    prefixes in CGN, until they get totally blocked, which means extra
    CAPEX in new IPv4 transfers.

What does "This" refer to?
- If it refers to 464XLAT, then I do not understand it. (Or, I think 
just the opposite is true: as the same public IP address and port number 
is ones used by a given user and then by another.)
- If it refers to MAP-E/T, then it should be made clear.

Section 7.1.1

                                                             On
    average, looking at the global statistics, the IPv6 traffic
    percentage is currently between 30% and 40% of_IPv6_.

Perhaps:

                                                             On
    average, looking at the global statistics, the IPv6 traffic
    percentage is currently between 30% and 40% of*the traffic*.


Section 7.1.3

an high percentage --> a high percentage

Section 7.2.

govern supporting --> governmental supporting

Section 7.4.1

[APNIC5] -- should be a link (twice)

                                       [APRICOT  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment#ref-APRICOT>] highlights how when a
    difference in performance exists it is often related to asymmetric
    routing issues.

Perhaps "how when" is not proper.

                     Other possible explanations for a relative latency
    difference lays on the specificity of the IPv6 header which allows
    packet fragmentation.

I do not understand this.

Section 7.4.2.

[FB] -- should be a link


Section 7.5.

                           Some hints are in the
    paper [ComputSecur  <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment#ref-ComputSecur>].


Thank you for citing it. :-)

You might want to add also:

A. Al-Azzawi and G. Lencse, "Identification of the Possible Security 
Issues of the 464XLAT IPv6 Transition Technology", /Infocommunications 
Journal/, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 10-18, December 2021, DOI: 
10.36244/ICJ.2021.4.2
Full paper in PDF 
<http://www.hit.bme.hu/~lencse/publications/InfocomJ_2021_4_2_Al-Azzawi.pdf>

Section 7.5.1.

[RIPE2] -- should be a link

On 3/7/2022 11:30 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations WG of the IETF.
>
>          Title           : IPv6 Deployment Status
>          Authors         : Giuseppe Fioccola
>                            Paolo Volpato
>                            Nalini Elkins
>                            Jordi Palet Martinez
>                            Gyan S. Mishra
>                            Chongfeng Xie
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment-05.txt
> 	Pages           : 46
> 	Date            : 2022-03-07
>
> Abstract:
>     This document provides an overview of IPv6 deployment status and a
>     view on how the transition to IPv6 is progressing among network
>     operators and enterprises.  It also aims to analyze the related
>     challenges and therefore encourage actions and more investigations in
>     those areas where the industry has not taken a clear and unified
>     approach.
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment/
>
> There is also an htmlized version available at:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment-05
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment-05
>
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops