Bill Thanks for your comments, Michael and I just went through all of them and here are our own feedback. - cosmetic and typos are fixed now (MANY thanks) as well as your suggestions to improved readability - we moved RFC 6860 short text from the introduction to approach section - RFC 4443 specifies when to send the ICMP message, so, we left the text unchanged
And of course, we added your name in the acknowledgement section -éric & michael > -----Original Message----- > From: OPSEC [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill Cerveny > Sent: lundi 18 novembre 2013 23:10 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [OPSEC] Comments on draft-ietf-opsec-lla-only-04.xml > > I've reviewed draft-ietf-opsec-lla-only-04. I've sent my detailed > suggested revisions and comments directly to the authors, but at a > high level: > > 1) The introduction makes reference to RFC6860 regarding OSPFv2 and > OSPFv3, but then doesn't mention this in the rest of the document. > Why is this in the introduction? Why is this not mentioned in the > rest of the document? > 2) I'm not sure if it is common knowledge what is intended by phrase, > "greater than link-local-scope", or at least I wasn't familiar with > it. Minimally, can the document include a reference to how "greater" > or "less than" is used in terms of address types? > 3) At the end of the document, you make reference to "the traditional > approach". I don't think you've clarified what you mean by "the > traditional approach", although I can guess what you've meant. > > Bill Cerveny > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec _______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
