Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-mech-v2-06.txt

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:15:40 +0300 (EEST)

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Pekka Savola wrote:
> However, to fix the problem pointed out by 1) in a slightly better
> way, I'd suggest wording like (changes in the first sentence only):
> 
> The encapsulating IPv4 header is discarded, *and the resulting packet
> is checked for validity when submitted to the IPv6 layer*. When
> reconstructing the IPv6 packet the length MUST be determined from the
> IPv6 payload length since the IPv4 packet might be padded (thus have a
> length which is larger than the IPv6 packet plus the IPv4 header being
> removed).
> 
> If you have comments/objections to this, please state them
> ****off-list**** within a day or so.

(co-chair hat on)

Due to receiving only positive feedback, the -06 version incorporating 
the WG consensus has been submitted for publication.

It can also be found at, along with a number of htmlwdiffs:

http://www.netcore.fi/pekkas/ietf/temp/

Please bring up any [serious] issues you might have with -06 version
by Monday, September 6th at the latest.  I'll try to get this on the
next IESG agenda (DL for items is on 9th).

Thanks!

(hat off)

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings