> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:19:44 +0200,
> Markku Savela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> 4) I'm not sure whether I see the immediate need for the unique subnet
>> multicast scope assignment, as below:
>>
>> Furthermore, to avoid the need to perform manual configuration in
>> most cases, an impl
> The documents with >5 authors at the header need to be specially agreed to
> with the IESG.
> 2) strike off 1-2 most inactive authors and put them in a "Contributors"
> section
I think there is only a histrical reason why my name is listed in authors,
as an author of combined I-D (draft-ietf-
Hi,
Thanks for very careful and thoughful responses. This is the kind of
editing we need! :-)
Comments to remaining issues inline..
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, JINMEI Tatuya / [ISO-2022-JP] [EMAIL PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote:
> > 1) the number of authors is too many (6). No more than 5 is allowed. I'd
Again, thanks for the detailed comments.
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:26:55 +0200 (EET),
> Pekka Savola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> substantial
> 1) the number of authors is too many (6). No more than 5 is allowed. I'd
> suggest removing one, or putting everyone except the current document
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:26:55 +0200 (EET),
> Pekka Savola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Below are my LC comments on the scoping-arch document.
Thanks for the careful reading and detailed comments. From a quick
glance, it seems to me most (or probably all) of your points are
reasonable. I
Clarifying two comments (maybe I should have proof-read them more
carefully)..
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Pekka Savola wrote:
> 7) In the section 9, "Forwarding", the second rule about sending an ICMP DU
> is specified. Has it already been considered whether this applies to
> multicast destination addre
Minor comment on comments..
> From: Pekka Savola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 4) I'm not sure whether I see the immediate need for the unique subnet
> multicast scope assignment, as below:
>
>Furthermore, to avoid the need to perform manual configuration in
>most cases, an implementation should
Hi,
Below are my LC comments on the scoping-arch document.
In general, I think the document is in a pretty good shape, but can be
improved slightly. I think it should be possible to send the document to
the IESG after a revision.
Two major points to note:
- the ICMPv6-bis document is stalled a
