Jen, thanks for the updates. Pete, thanks for your response. I cleared my
DISCUSS.
Cheers,
Alissa
> On Jul 3, 2019, at 10:58 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
>
> Hi Jen,
>
> Thanks for the additional updates. A few comments inline.
>
> On 3 Jul 2019, at 20:07, Jen Linkova wrote:
>
>>> Again, hosts
Hi Jen,
Thanks for the additional updates. A few comments inline.
On 3 Jul 2019, at 20:07, Jen Linkova wrote:
Again, hosts pick default addresses for applications to use, and
applications pick the addresses that packets will use.
OK, I guess we are just using different terminology here...
Hi Pete,
On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 8:47 AM Pete Resnick wrote:
> It's not just that the address selection is for new connections, though
> that is certainly true. It's also the question of who is doing what:
> Hosts figure out the address for default address selection, and
> applications are the
Hi Jen,
Thanks for the reply, and the new draft. Some comments, inline:
On 1 Jul 2019, at 10:24, Jen Linkova wrote:
Throughout, but particularly in section 5, this document refers to
"hosts"
doing address selection. To be fair, so does RFC 6724, but 6724 is
referring to
*default* address
Hi Pete,
Thanks for reviewing the draft - not the shortest one...;)
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 1:42 AM Pete Resnick via Datatracker
wrote:
> I found this overall to be an excellent document with clear technical
> explanations that even an upper-layer knucklehead like me could understand.
> However,
Pete, thank you for your review. I entered a DISCUSS ballot on the basis of
your first point.
Alissa
> On Jun 4, 2019, at 11:41 AM, Pete Resnick via Datatracker
> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Pete Resnick
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The
