Re: Review of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-spec-02

Hi Steve -

Thanks for attending to this review to quickly.

> Regarding the terminology, the draft explicitly states why we didn't  
> use
> "IP" though technically correct to mean "IPv4 or IPv6".  I  
> personally am
> less worried about IPvX being mistaken for IPX than I am about IP  
> being
> mistaken for IPv4 (and not IPv6).  How would you feel about s/IPvX/ 
> IPxZ/?

OK, I understand.  I would personally go for "IPv4 or IPv6", but you  
decide.

> BTW, there are theads started on VRRP list to discuss Mark Handley's  
> TSV
> directorate review.

Yes, very good.  I have seen them.

- Christian


_______________________________________________
vrrp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp