Subject: [dhcwg] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-05: (with COMMENT)

From: "Mirja Kuehlewind" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 02:03:42 -0800

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-05: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue/

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

I think it would make sense if this doc updates RFC 3633 because someone
who (newly) implements RFC 3633 should really also read this document and
hance needs this pointer.

Also, I would move section 3.6 to the beginning but that doesn't really
matter.

---

From: tianxiang li <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 09:57:55 +0800

Hi Mirja,

Thank you for the review and suggestion. I think we could make a pointer to
say this document updates RFC 3633.
We'll add this in the updated document.

Cheers,
Tianxiang