On Wed, 10 May 2023, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
Thanks for the changes to address my concerns.
The idea here is that the other "1" should also be described here.
[Med] That other "1" is about the address count. This is why we are referring to an "address" not
"addresses". Made this change "s/Its IPv6 address (2001:db8:99:88:77:66:55:44)/Its single IPv6 address
(2001:db8:99:88:77:66:55:44)".
Maybe: Its single (1) Pv6 address (2001:db8:99:88:77:66:55:44)" to
make it abundantly clear?
Based on this email (and Valery's other email), I've cleared my DISCUSS.
Paul
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
