[dhcwg] Actions for draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra after IESG evaluation
"Eric Vyncke \(evyncke\)" <[email protected]> Fri, 22 Aug 2025 10:43:00 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.dhc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <PH0PR11MB4966AB9BCB8DE77469EEF677A93DA@PH0PR11MB4966.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> |
--===============3124910382881535454==
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_PH0PR11MB4966AB9BCB8DE77469EEF677A93DAPH0PR11MB4966namp_"
--_000_PH0PR11MB4966AB9BCB8DE77469EEF677A93DAPH0PR11MB4966namp_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear authors and DHC WG,
Dale, Mike, Roman,
The IESG evaluation of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra was positive, i=
.e., the document is accepted but still requires three changes:
- let=92s decide whether this I-D updates RFC 7341 (i.e., requiring an =93U=
pdate=94 tag in the header); the sentence `this document specifies an amend=
ment to [RFC7341]` in section 1 seems to indicate that it formally updates =
RFC. From my side, it does not really update it, it is simply a different u=
se case, so probably better to rephrase the sentence.
- the GENART review, there is a mismatch between -05 and what was said in r=
eply to Dale=92s review by email for the main technical comment in section =
3 (all other review comments are implemented). Either make a -06 consistent=
with the reply to Dal e or discuss with him (cc: Roman Danyliw) to check w=
hether he agrees with -05
- other ballots by Deb, Erik, and Ketan suggest editorial (typos) changes, =
which should probably be executed.
Once a revised I-D with the above changes is submitted, I am approving the =
I-D.
Regards
-=E9ric
--_000_PH0PR11MB4966AB9BCB8DE77469EEF677A93DAPH0PR11MB4966namp_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:sc=
hemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/of=
fice/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3DWindows-1=
252">
<meta name=3D"Generator" content=3D"Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;
panose-1:2 11 0 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:11.0pt;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang=3D"en-BE" link=3D"#467886" vlink=3D"#96607D" style=3D"word-wrap:=
break-word">
<div class=3D"WordSection1">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Dear authors and DHC WG,<o:p></=
o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Dale, Mike, Roman,<o:p></o:p></=
span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">The IESG evaluation of draft-ie=
tf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6-ra was positive, i.e., the document is accepted b=
ut still requires three changes:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">- let=92s decide whether this I=
-D updates RFC 7341 (i.e., requiring an =93Update=94 tag in the header); th=
e sentence `this document specifies an amendment to [RFC7341]` in section 1=
seems to indicate that it formally updates
RFC. From my side, it does not really update it, it is simply a different =
use case, so probably better to rephrase the sentence.<o:p></o:p></span></p=
>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">- the GENART review, there is a=
mismatch between -05 and what was said in reply to Dale=92s review by emai=
l for the main technical comment in section 3 (all other review comments ar=
e implemented). Either make a -06 consistent
with the reply to Dal e or discuss with him (cc: Roman Danyliw) to check w=
hether he agrees with -05<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">- other ballots by Deb, Erik, a=
nd Ketan suggest editorial (typos) changes, which should probably be execut=
ed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Once a revised I-D with the abo=
ve changes is submitted, I am approving the I-D.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US">-=E9ric<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>
--_000_PH0PR11MB4966AB9BCB8DE77469EEF677A93DAPH0PR11MB4966namp_--
--===============3124910382881535454==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline
X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZGhjd2cgbWFp
bGluZyBsaXN0IC0tIGRoY3dnQGlldGYub3JnClRvIHVuc3Vic2NyaWJlIHNlbmQgYW4gZW1haWwg
dG8gZGhjd2ctbGVhdmVAaWV0Zi5vcmcK
--===============3124910382881535454==--