Just to close the loop: All of Brian’s responses look fine to me. Thanks!
Ben. > On Dec 14, 2017, at 12:42 PM, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 14/12/2017 17:20, Ben Campbell wrote: > ...> - On my first reading, I wondered why this was informational. It seems > to seek >> to standardize protocol elements. The explanation in the shepherd report >> clarifies that; it would be helpful to include (a perhaps shortened version >> of) >> that in the draft. > > Awaiting instructions, but we can certainly do that if there's to be > a new version of the draft. > >> >> -2: RFC 8174 has boilerplate to address the "only in upper case" part. Please >> consider using it rather than modifying the 2119 boilerplate. > > Ack, the RFC Editor could do that too. > >> >> -4.4: "It is therefore important to record all the prefix assignment >> history." >> Isn’t this a local policy choice? Perhaps some operator believes in extreme >> log >> minimization, does this mean to argue they are mistaken? > > I'd say it is a requirement in order to detect or trace lost prefixes > after outages, and probably a legal requirement in many countries > (once jurisdictions realise that IPv6 prefixes are needed for tracing, > not just addresses). But I agree that it isn't a requirement on the > protocol defined in this draft, so it should be rephrased. > > Thanks > Brian > > >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
