Looks good to me. Thanks again for addressing my comment. Regards,
Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: Tore Anderson [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 11:27 AM > To: Jari Arkko > Cc: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); General Area Review Team; draft-ietf-v6ops-siit- > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam-01 > > * Jari Arkko > > > > When translating a packet between IPv4 and IPv6, an SIIT > > > implementation MUST individually translate each IP address it > > > encounters in the packet's IP headers (including any IP headers > > > contained within ICMP errors) according to Section 3.3, except for > > > any address for which Section 4 explicitly states that the EAM > > > algorithm MUST NOT be used. > > > > I think this makes sense, and I at least feel this is better text than > > the original. Thanks. > > Hello Jari, > > My co-author felt the above was a bit too "conjunction-overflowy", so we > ended up with the following: > > Unless otherwise specified in Section 4, an SIIT implementation MUST > individually translate each IP address it encounters in the packet's > IP headers (including any IP headers contained within ICMP errors) > according to Section 3.3. > > This is in draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam-02. I hope you see this too as an > improvement over the original? > > Tore _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
