I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments just
TJ wrote:
> A bit before then, Thomas Narten wrote:
> > There are DoD networks where IPv6 is running today,
> > and there certainly are networks where it is not.
>
> The quote above seems very precisely phrased,
> and as an accidental result seems a bit misleading.
>
> It appears to refer to the
>
> A bit before then, Thomas Narten wrote:
> > There are DoD networks where IPv6 is running today,
> > and there certainly are networks where it is not.
>
> The quote above seems very precisely phrased,
> and as an accidental result seems a bit misleading.
>
> It appears to refer to the Defense Re
