Subject: [BEHAVE] Comments on draft-ietf-behave-address-format-03

From: Dave Thaler <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2010 03:44:07 +0000

My comments and suggested wording changes on this document are marked up in the PDF at
http://research.microsoft.com/~dthaler/draft-ietf-behave-address-format-03.pdf

To summarize the main comments:

1) Someplace needs to discuss how a node gets an IPv4-translatable address. 
It seems they cannot be used with SLAAC on a regular interface.
Are they usable only with DHCPv6 or manual configurable? Assuming so, 
someplace needs to say so.

2) Section 3.3 is really hard to follow without a diagram.

3) The last row in figure 1 is still wrong.

4) Sections 3.1 and 3.2 appear to contradict each other regarding whether
the WKP can appear in interdomain routing tables.

5) The argument that WKP MUST NOT contain non-global IPv4 addresses
because "Doing so would introduce ambiguous IPv6 addresses" doesn't
hold in the "an IPv6 network to an IPv4 network" scenario.  The
doc needs to either motivate it, change the restriction, or just 
remove the incorrect motivation leave the restriction without 
explanation.

-Dave