Re: [v6ops] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum-05

Fernando Gont <> Tue, 20 October 2020 20:00 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0389F3A1350; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:00:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.146
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.146 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.247, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PfW-wxbIJhQR; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:00:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:67c:27e4::14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF4D13A1351; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:b9c:69b8:4602:916c:a007] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:b9c:69b8:4602:916c:a007]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 475EC2839E9; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 19:59:56 +0000 (UTC)
To: Sheng Jiang <>,
References: <>
From: Fernando Gont <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:43:10 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Intdir telechat review of draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum-05
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:00:05 -0000

Hello, Sheng,

Thanks so much for your comments! In-line....

On 19/10/20 23:58, Sheng Jiang via Datatracker wrote:
> Overall Summary:
> This draft is a document that intents to be an Informational  RFC. This
> document gives some recommendation to  improve the reaction and performance of
> Customer Edge Routers in the IPv6 renumbering events.  It updates RFC7084.
> Overall this is a well written document. There is a small Nit: in the
> information reference, [I-D.gont-6man-slaac-renum] has been listed twice.

Note: [I-D.gont-6man-slaac-renum] is referenced to Ack the folks that 
reviewed that document, on which the present one is based.

> However, I have a more fundamental question. It may be easily addressed by AD
> saying it was not an issue: as an informational document, it should only give
> information or recommendation to the readers or implementors. However, this
> document has a lot of "MUST", which is too strong and I think it should only
> appear in Standard Stack or BCP documents. If so, this document may need
> revise, even rework in the WG.

Please see Section 2. Those terms are *not* being employed as in 
RFC2119, and are employed in the same was as in RFC7084, which this 
document means to update.


Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492