u have any more comment on this text ?
Regards,
-éric
-Original Message-
From: Bob Hinden
Date: Saturday, 9 November 2019 at 17:46
To: Eric Vyncke
Cc: Bob Hinden , Gyan Mishra ,
"opsec@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [OPSEC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsec-v6-21.txt
Eric,
> O
Cathing up with emails….all the reviews are *greatly* appreciated and
especially the language ones so that any ambiguities of meaning can be fixed.
Since Eric mentions me below I’ll just state that my order of language learning
was Estonian-German-English (followed by French and
> On Nov 9, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Gyan Mishra wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Nov 9, 2019, at 4:49 PM, Ole Troan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 9 Nov 2019, at 22:35, Bob Hinden wrote:
>>>
>>> The hop-by-hop options header, when present in an IPv6 packet, forces
>>> all nodes in the path to
> On Nov 9, 2019, at 4:49 PM, Ole Troan wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 9 Nov 2019, at 22:35, Bob Hinden wrote:
>>
>> The hop-by-hop options header, when present in an IPv6 packet, forces
>> all nodes in the path to inspect this header in the original IPv6
>> specification [RFC2460].
t;>>
>>>> [Gyan] I agree with Bob about RFC 8200 as it’s a major update to the
>>>> original IPv6 specification written in 1998 by Bob as well. The other two
>>>> are minor and agree to the historical deprecated informational references.
>>>
>>&g
commonly used by router vendors when switching
>> from the slow software switched path which hits the RP CPU versus the
>> hardware switched fast path which remains on the line card NP processor.
>
> I understand what it means, but as I said its colloquial and may not be clear
&g
is commonly used by router vendors when switching from
> the slow software switched path which hits the RP CPU versus the hardware
> switched fast path which remains on the line card NP processor.
I understand what it means, but as I said its colloquial and may not be clear
to some readers.
ences like they are as we believe that they make the
> document more valuable for the reader.
>
> Regards
>
> -éric
>
> From: Gyan Mishra
> Date: Saturday, 9 November 2019 at 08:28
> To: Eric Vyncke
> Cc: "opsec@ietf.org" , "i-d-annou...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OPSEC] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsec-v6-21.txt
Eric
I submitted the shepherd write-up.
I ran the idnits and it found the following obsolete references. We should
clear that up before we publish it. I can update my comments on that once the
draft is updated.
Checking references
Hello Gyan,
Thank you for reminding the author to post the 'gist' of the changes with
version -21.
Our OPS AD, Warren "Ace" Kumari, has kindly reviewed our document and has
identified more than 70 areas where the text was ambiguous or using bad
English... No wonder, none of the 4 authors are
Hi Eric
Just checking what the updates are that went in v21 since this document is now
ready to be published just pending my Shepard writeup which I plan to finish
this week.
Thank you
Gyan
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 3, 2019, at 4:56 PM, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote:
>
>
> A New
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Operational Security Capabilities for IP
Network Infrastructure WG of the IETF.
Title : Operational Security Considerations for IPv6 Networks
Authors
12 matches
Mail list logo
