[pim] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-pim-updt-ip v6-dyn-mcast-addr-grp-id-12: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pim-updt-ipv6-dyn-mcast-addr-grp-id-12: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-updt-ipv6-dyn-mcast-addr-grp-id/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to Sue Hares for the GENART review.

** idnits reports:
  -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC3307, but the
     abstract doesn't seem to directly say this.

[Roman] Please explicitly state that this document updates RFC3307.

  == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC
     2119 boilerplate text.

[Roman] Remove the boilerplate text.

** Abstract.  Editorial.
   It recommends
   replacing these allocations with a new IANA registry in the IPv6
   Multicast Address Space registry group.

What does it mean to have a recommendation to replace allocations? Doesn’t it
define a new allocation?  The current text reads like a suggestion is being
made.

** Section 3.  Consider citing Section 4.1 and 4.2 of RFC8126 to explain the
“Private Use” and “Experimental” ranges.



_______________________________________________
pim mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]