Subject: [bmwg] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-ipv6-tran-tech-benchmarking-07: (with COMMENT)

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 16:02:30 -0700

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bmwg-ipv6-tran-tech-benchmarking-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-ipv6-tran-tech-benchmarking/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I was surprised not to find any mention of RFC 4380 (Teredo) in this document.
If its omission was intentional, a statement to that effect (say, in the
introduction) is probably warranted.

---

From: Marius Georgescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:02:55 +0300

Hello Adam,

Thank you for your review.
Our intention was to include the most forward looking (popular) IPv6 transition technologies in the list. 
Moreover, when starting the draft, teredo was towards the end of its "shelf life".
We can note in the Introduction that the list is not exhaustive.

Best regards,
Marius
 
> On Jun 8, 2017, at 2:02 AM, Adam Roach <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg