I have a couple of comments on the draft: - I think the draft explains the motivation of introducing the new scope. It will also help understand the vague term of the "Network-Specific" scope, or "defined automatically from the network topology". I've checked the ML archive and understood it's related to http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 But I suspect it's quite difficult to figure it out just from the generic description of the draft. - You might want to explicitly note that this new scope is smaller than the Admin (or Site or Organization) -Local scope and that if the administrator configures an Admin/Site/Organization-Local scope zone for a network, that zone must not be separated by a Network-Specific scope zone per the scoped address architecture (RFC 4007). This restriction is not specific to this particular relationship, but since the Network-Specific scope (seems) dynamic and self defined while Admin/Site/Organization-Local scopes are always defined manually, I guess it'll be more likely to cause accidental violation.
-- JINMEI, Tatuya Infoblox Inc. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
