Comments like this one should really have been sent during the wg last call, long ago...
That said, I tend to agree with Francis that MUST is too strong. As about ALG, I do not see what is wrong there. - Alain. On Mar 17, 2011, at 4:55 AM, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear all, > > I have just read the new DS-Lite version and I have the following comments > for Section 8: > > (1) > > " > 8.2. NAT conformance > > > A dual-stack lite AFTR SHOULD implement behavior conforming to the > best current practice, currently documented in [RFC4787] and > [RFC5382]. Other discusions about carrier-grade NATs can be found in > [I-D.nishitani-cgn]." > > * This text should be updated to something like: "a DS-Lite AFTR MUST follow > the requirements specified in [I-D.ietf-behave-lsn-requirements]". > * In addition, [I-D.ietf-behave-lsn-requirements] is to be listed as a > normative reference. > > (2) > > Section "8.3. Application Level Gateways (ALG)" is to be removed since this > can be covered in [I-D.ietf-behave-lsn-requirements]. > > > Cheers, > Med > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la > part de Alain Durand > Envoyé : jeudi 3 mars 2011 16:50 > À : Jari Arkko; Ralph Droms > Cc : [email protected] list; Yong Cui > Objet : [Softwires] DS-lite update > > Dear ADs, > > New rev of the them main DS-lite doc (draft-ietf-softwire-dual-stack-lite-07) > and the DHCP tunnel option (draft-ietf-softwire-ds-lite-tunnel-option-09) > have been published. I believe they address all remaining comments. This > should enable to restart the IESG process. > > - Alain. > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
