IMHO it's a no brainer. Two nits in one sentence: > Hence. future > assignments from this registry are discouraged but in exceptional > circumstances are to be made through Standards Action [IANABIS].
s/./,/ [IANABIS] is now RFC5226 and should be a normative reference, I think. Regards Brian Carpenter University of Auckland On 2008-07-15 07:16, Brian Haberman wrote: > All, > This Last Call received exactly 1 comment (thanks Alex!). If you > have read this document, please indicate either your support or > opposition to being advanced. Silence is not interpreted as consensus. > > Regards, > Brian > > > Brian Haberman wrote: >> All, >> This message starts a 3-week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on >> advancing: >> >> Title : Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers >> Author(s) : S. Krishnan >> Filename : draft-ietf-6man-reserved-iids-00.txt >> Pages : 11 >> Date : 2008-02-08 >> >> as a Proposed Standard. Substantive comments and statements of >> support for advancing this document should be directed to the mailing >> list. Editorial suggestions can be sent to the document editor. This >> last call will end on July 10, 2008. >> >> Regards, >> Brian & Bob >> 6MAN co-chairs >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> ipv6@ietf.org >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
