The China Education and Research Network (CERNET) IVI Translation Design and Deployment for the IPv4/IPv6 Coexistence and Transition
RFC 6219

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

Comment (2009-12-10 for -)
No email
send info
Brian Carpenter suggests informational status. I would like to do that.

(Adrian Farrel) Yes

Comment (2010-01-01 for -)
No email
send info
I support the publication of this document.
While it was clearly an experiment and would have been suitable for publication as Experimental when it was first written, I agree with Jari that as time has moved on, thi should be published as Informational to describe the experiment that has been completed with lessons learned.

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Ralph Droms) No Objection

Comment (2010-01-03 for -)
No email
send info
I have a minor question about translating unmapped IPv6 addresses.  In section 3.6:

   [...] the inverse
   mapping for unmapped addresses is defined in this document.  In the
   current prototype, a pseudo IPv4 address is generated.

I can't find the the description of the inverse mapping or how the prototype generates the IPv4 address.  Nit: I assume the generated IPv4 address is a real IPv4 address, so "pseudo IPv4 address" isn't quite accurate.

In Appendix B:

   Note that the non-IVI IPv6 addresses are mapped to 202.38.17.186,
   which is defined in this document (the first two sections are the
   IPv4 prefix of /16 of the IVI translator interface and the last two
   sections are the autonomous system number 4538).

I don't see any other occurrences of "202.38.17.186" in the document, so I'm not sure what the text is referring to.  I also can't find the definition of the translation (for clarity, I would call this a "translation" because the IPv6 address is "unmappable"), which I'm guessing is referred to in the parenthetical text.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

Comment (2010-01-05 for -)
No email
send info
  The Gen-ART Review by Elwyn Davies on 4 January 2010 provided many
  suggestions for greater clarity and many other editorial improvements.
  Please conside these suggestions.

  Elwyn also said:
  >
  > It also needs a fair bit of attention from somebody whose mother
  > tongue is English.  I have sent a file to the authors with lots of
  > suggestions for this work.

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection