I like the draft and I think it covers the motivational points well. as a general comment, I do think the document is too wordy. could the authors make the next revision terser or do you want me to propose text changes?
I would also suggest that you reference the sections in rfc1958 on state. we don't have a good success record in gleaning state in the middle of the network (NAT, N:1 VLANs, DHCP...), since the protocols we 'glean' from aren't designed to maintain softstate in the network. I see no reason why this document shouldn't be adopted as a working group document immediately. cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list Softwires@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
