Hi authors, I went over this draft to check whether it is ready to advance from the WG. The latest revision of the draft is highly improved and has addressed most of the concerns I had on clarity. I do have a few minor concerns though, and I would like to see them addressed before sending the draft along the publication process.
* Introduction The draft needs a bit more motivation on why an ISP with a lot of IPv4 address resources does not simply run dual stack. * Section 3 4over6 CE: This section seems to be stating that the 4over6 CE does not provide IPv6 service to the customer network if it is a CPE. Is this true? If so, this seems to be wrong and needs to be fixed. * Section 4 It is not clear how this mechanism "integrates easily" with DS-Lite as claimed. Can you add a bit more text on how this will be accomplished * Section 5.1 The arrows in the figure are confusing. e.g. what information does the 4over6 CE provide to the DHCPv6 server. If none, why is the arrow bidirectional? Suggest making the arrows unidirectional to show the flow of information. * Section 6 Which DHCPv6 option does the 4over6 CE use to get the BR address. Is it the AFTR-Name option? This needs to be clarified. Thanks Suresh _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
