Subject: AD review of draft-ietf-6man-reserved-iids

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:48:52 +0200

I have reviewed this specification. It is basically in good shape, 
though there were a few annoying editorial bugs that I would ask to be 
fixed if it weren't for the I-D submissions block at this time. Given 
this, I have sent the draft forward for IETF Last Call.

> e.g.  An IPv6 node ...
For instance, an IPv6 node ...

> address sutoconfiguration standards

I must have missed these standards, unless, of course, you mean the 
address autoconfiguration standards :-)

> PMIP

Previously unknown abbreviation introduced here.

But I would just take the entire PMIP example out, it appears to be more 
confusing than helpful, and I believe the downref issue already is 
clear. Does PMIP even allocate such addresses? I thought not.

> e.g. Reserving certain identifiers 
Same as above -- I'm not actually sure if this is proper English.

Jari

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:13:14 -0500

Hi Jari,
   Thanks for your comments. I agree with all of them. I will submit a 
revised version after the last call completes.

Cheers
Suresh