Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance WGLC

Support this draft forward.

Some comments:

In section 4 "Arranging IPv6 Connectivity"
> There are, in theory, two ways to obtain IPv6 connectivity to the Internet. ... Native...Tunnel...
Although double translation doesn't concern ICPs, maybe it's better to mention it ? Since there might be confusion that translation was just missed to be considered.

In section 5.1, the last paragraph
We have two auto-config methods(DHCP/SLAAC) in IPv6, which is one of the most significant differences between IPv4. So, it may be worth to mention the DHCP/SLAAC co-existence issue. The issue has been documented by [RFC5887] and [6reum-gap-analysis], which could be references.

In section 12, second paragraph
> There is significant overlap here with the tools involved in site renumbering [I-D.jiang-6renum-enterprise].
[6renum-enterprise] only mentioned the tool, a brief detailed discussion about IPAM tool was in [6renum-gap-analysis], however, it may not be sufficient for OAM consideration. Maybe just simply deleting the reference is better.

-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred Baker (fred)
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 1:30 PM
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Cc: V6ops Chairs; Ron Bonica
Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance WGLC

This is to open a two week Working Group last Call on 

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance
  "IPv6 Guidance for Internet Content and Application Service Providers",
  Brian Carpenter, Sheng Jiang, 10-Jul-12

Please read it now. We are interested in, among other things, technical commentary on the draft and the working group's perception on its usefulness to its target audience.
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops