Document: draft-ietf-v6ops-prefer8781 Title: Recommendations for Discovering IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis Reviewer: Ted Lemon Review result: Ready with Issues This is a DNSDIR review, which is done as a service to the IESG and should not be taken by the authors or working group as carrying any more weight than any other individual contributor's review. This draft documents numerous issues with RFC7050 relating to the behavior of DNS, and, to the best of my ability to evaluate, correctly describes these issues. As such, I see no problems with this document's use of and description of DNS. Indeed, there is substantial useful criticism of RFC7050 here. I do have some very (very!) optional editorial suggestions: The abstract is longer than I think is necessary. An abstract should be a very brief explanation of why the reader should read the document, not a detailed description of what is in the document. It's mostly fine, but I would take out the detail about RFC7050 and just say that this document changes the recommended approach for discovering the prefix to RFC8781. I would suggest similarly updating the introduction, which explains the problem and catalogues existing solutions in great detail rather than saying what the document does. I.e., nowhere in the introduction does it say "this document recommends using PREF64 and address synthesis rather than DNS64." I would also suggest moving section 4 before section 3 and referencing section 3. Section 3 is really only of interest to us in our discussions of which approach is better. This document represents our choice to recommend what is documented in section 4. So we should lead with that. If someone wants the whole explanation, great, but an implementor could completely skip section 3 and still know what to do. -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
