Skip to main content

IPv6 Subnet Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet Prefixes
draft-ietf-6man-ipv6-subnet-model-12

Yes

(Jari Arkko)

No Objection

(Adrian Farrel)
(Alexey Melnikov)
(Cullen Jennings)
(Lars Eggert)
(Lisa Dusseault)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Pasi Eronen)
(Peter Saint-Andre)
(Robert Sparks)
(Ron Bonica)
(Ross Callon)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 12 and is now closed.

Jari Arkko Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Cullen Jennings Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Dan Romascanu Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection (2010-03-10) Unknown
I support Lars' DISCUSS about the need to include mandatory 2119 boilerplate.
Lars Eggert Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Lisa Dusseault Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Pasi Eronen Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Peter Saint-Andre Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ralph Droms Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection (2010-04-22) Unknown
I still find the description of the example in section 5 unclear.  The syntax in this passage is tortured:

   An address
   could be acquired through the DHCPv6 IA_NA option (which does not
   include a prefix length), or through manual configuration (if no
   prefix length is specified).  The host incorrectly assumes an
   invented prefix is on-link.  This invented prefix typically is a /64
   that was written by the developer of the API as a "default" prefix
   length when a length isn't specified.  This may cause the API to seem
   to work in the case of a network interface initiating SLAAC, however
   it can cause connectivity problems in NBMA networks.

What is the API referred to in the example?

The changes to the word "deprecate" and the new section on changes to RFC 4861 satisfy my comments on those details.
Robert Sparks Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ron Bonica Former IESG member
(was Discuss) No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Ross Callon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Russ Housley Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2010-03-10) Unknown
  The Gen-ART Review by Pete McCann on 2010-03-09 included some
  editorial comments.  Please consider them if an update to this
  document is needed for any reason.