Hi Sebastian, Indeed. Most comments are editorial as your draft is very well written already. The main issues which may become non-editorial are (1) whether to make the demarcation points flexible; (2) some more discussions on the mapping between prefix and information mapping. I will be more than happy to send a few more sentences right after this ietf.
Regarding the 64 bits example. What if the prefix is say 65 bits. It looks that the nested if will skip it. Do I misunderstand? Richard On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Sebastian Kiesel <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Richard, > > many thanks for the review - already looking forward for part 2. > > After quickly browsing your comments, most seem to be more or > less editorial, except for one technical issue: > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 09:01:02PM +0200, Y. Richard Yang wrote: > > > > - Sec. 2.3.4 > > 2. if the prefix length is 64 bits, the domain name is shortened by > > 16 labels (i.e., purge the 16th dot from the left and everything > > left of it), > > > > [yry: 127-64?] > > I think our wording is correct. We want to strip 64 bits (from 128 total). > These 64 bits correspond to 16 hexadecimal digits, called labels in DNS > speak, > each separated by a dot. > > Does this make sense to you? > > > Thanks again! > Sebastian > -- -- ===================================== | Y. Richard Yang <[email protected]> | | Professor of Computer Science | | http://www.cs.yale.edu/~yry/ | =====================================
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
