Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit-04: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-ext-transmit/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- As "Catch 22" is one of my favourite books ( http://staringatemptypages.blogspot.com/2007/10/you-must-read-this.html ), it pleases me to know that there'll be an RFC with a reference to it. -- Section 4 -- Additionally, IANA is requested to make the existing empty IPv6 Next Header Types registry redirect users to a new IPv6 Extension Header Types registry. It will contain only those protocol numbers which are also marked as IPv6 Extension Header types in the Assigned Internet Protocol Numbers registry. Two small points here: 1. "It" in the second sentence is ambiguous: it could refer to either of the registries mentioned in the first sentence. I suggest making it "The IPv6 Extension Header Types registry will contain...". 2. Is it your intent that the (empty) IPv6 Next Header Types registry also be closed to new registrations? Whether or not, it would be best to make that clear. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
