Subject: (ngtrans) WG Last Call on IPv4 Survey

From: "Tony Hain" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:39:32 -0700

This is an ngtrans working group last call for comments on advancing the
following document as Informational:

  Title: Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards
  Author: Phil Nesser
  Document: draft-ietf-ngtrans-ipv4survey-02.txt

Please send substantive comments to the ngtrans mailing list, and minor
editorial comments to the author.

This last call period will end two weeks from Monday on July 15, 2002.

The ngtrans co-chairs, Tony / Alain / Margaret

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:19:19 +0200

This is a major piece of work and Phil has done a great job, but
I fear it isn't quite done yet. I think everybody needs to read it
and nit-pick. If we each find 4 or 5 nits the document will be
much improved.

My nits:

I'd remove section 1.4. I fully agree with it, but it is a comment
to the IESG and should be sent to them separately.

There are editing glitches in section 3.19.2.

There is the assertion that ARP and RARP (3.37 and 3.38) have no IPv4 
dependencies. There is perhaps a sense in which that's true, but in fact
they are IPv4-only protocols with no applicability to IPv6.

Section 4.04 (RFC 1188) should simply point to RFC 2019.

Section 4.05 (RFC 1191) should simply state that PMTU discovery is a
mandatory part of IPv6 and refer to RFC 1981.

   Brian

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 22:52:48 +0900

>mandatory part of IPv6 and refer to RFC 1981.

	careful - PMTUD is not mandatory if you generate packets smaller than
	1280 bytes only.

itojun

---

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 12:29:52 -0400

> 	careful - PMTUD is not mandatory if you generate packets smaller than

Be double careful. Even if you only send small packets, you may still
get Packet Too Big messages that require the sender to insert a
fragment header. draft-ietf-ipv6-cellular-host-03.txt talks about this
explicitly.

Thomas

---

From: "Philip J. Nesser II" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 17:11:01 -0700

Brian,

Thanks for the nits.  I will look into them.  

Everyone Else,

Please take Brian's suggestion to heart.  This document covers a vast
amount of protocols and topics, well beyond any single person's ability
to master.  Looking at it as a whole is amazingly daunting, but taking a
few RFC's that you wrote, implemented, contributed to, or are familiar
with and looking at that specific subset is a much easier task.  

--->  Phil  

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Brian E
Carpenter
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 5:19 AM
To: Tony Hain
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
Philip J. Nesser II
Subject: Re: (ngtrans) WG Last Call on IPv4 Survey

My nits:

   Brian