Subject: [Gen-art] (re)review of draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-14.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:56:37 +0100

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
< http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-14.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 20120208
IETF LC End Date: 20120216
IESG Telechat date: 20120216

Summary: Ready

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None (but with proposed changes agreed during the (last)
last call applied)

Nits/editorial comments:
 - 1 page 4: the CPE abbrev is not well known so should be introduced
  (or marked as well known as there are more and more documents in this
   area)

 - 4 page 7: my dictionary says the word proscription exists only singular,
  i.e., proscriptions -> proscription

Personal comments:
 - I am in favor of this document (as explained by some in the IETF ML,
  other solutions are worse)
 - I have no illusion about how it will be applied in the real world
 - this document and many others about CGN/LSN make the dangerous
  assumption there will be only one level of CGN/LSN
 - to delay the application of the document (i.e., the allocation of
   the shared address space) long enough there will be no /10
   available should be a very unfair way to (not) solve the problem (:-)

Regards

[email-masked]