Martin Vigoureux has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-softwire-iftunnel-06: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-iftunnel/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello, I am a bit puzzled because the Abstract recognizes that the document is built onto an incomplete data-set and that makes me wonder whether the model will be usable until the data-set is completed. Also, I really do not understand the update you propose to the registry. It seems that you point to the technology spec rather than to the original mib module definition, but I quickly looked and none of the specs I parsed define the mib entry/value, so getting rid of the existing reference appears to me as a clear loss of information. I think you should keep the original reference and add a new one if needed, but not simply replace. And if you have undertaken this effort of tidying the registry, why not complete it with the missing values? _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
