Hi Roni, Thank you for comments, we'll add the changes to the document in our next updated version. Please see inline.
Cheers, Tianxiang 2017-02-02 14:42 GMT+08:00 Roni Even <roni.e...@huawei.com>: > Hi, > > I will leave only the items that needed my response > > > > 7. In section 3.4 “If the client decided to use the prefix provided > by the server despite being longer than the prefix-length hint” yet I > did not see in section 3.2 that the server can provide a longer > prefix. > > > > [Tianxiang] This was mentioned in the last sentence of section 3.2: > > > > "If the requested prefix is not available in the server's prefix pool, and > the client also included a prefix-length hint in the same IA_PD option, > then the server SHOULD try to provide a prefix matching the prefix-length > value, or the prefix with the shortest length possible which is closest to > the prefix-length hint value." > > *[Roni Even] I understood from 3.2 that it should provide a shorter length > prefix closer to the request maybe “*or the prefix with the closest > possible length to the prefix-length hint value” > > > > [Tianxiang2] The original sentence was a bit confusing, perhaps we could > change it like this: > > > > OLD: "If the requested prefix is not available in the server's prefix > pool, and the client also included a prefix-length hint in the same IA_PD > option, then the server SHOULD try to provide a prefix matching the > prefix-length value, or the prefix with the shortest length possible which > is closest to the prefix-length hint value." > > > > NEW:"If the requested prefix is not available in the server's prefix pool, > and the client also included a prefix-length hint in the same IA_PD option, > then the server SHOULD provide a prefix matching the prefix-length hint, or > a prefix which is length is shorter and as close as possible to the > prefix-length hint. If the server could not provide a prefix which length > is shorter or equal to the prefix-length hint, the server SHOULD provide > the prefix which length is longer and as close as possible to the > prefix-length hint." > > > > *[Roni Even] I have no problem with this text since it will also work with > the rest of the document but is it what was really meant* > > > [Tianxiang3] This was the intended meaning of the original sentence, if the server could not honor the hint, it should provide a prefix closest to the hint, the client could then decide whether to accept or neglect this prefix. > *Also a nit* > > > > “or a prefix which is length is shorter and as close as possible to the > prefix-length hint. If the server could not provide a prefix which length > is shorter or equal to the prefix-length hint, the server SHOULD provide > the prefix which length is longer and as close as possible to the > prefix-length hint” > > > > to > > > > “or a prefix whose length is shorter and as close as possible to the > prefix-length hint. If the server could not provide a prefix with a shorter > or equal length to the prefix-length hint, the server SHOULD provide a > prefix whose length is longer and as close as possible to the prefix-length > hint” > [Tianxiang3] Thanks for the suggestion, we will edit this sentence accordingly. > > > > > Nits/editorial comments: > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
