[GGF-ipv6-wg] Re: Final edits: [ggf-editor | Submit GGF Draft - 981] Guidelines for IP
Tim Chown
tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Thu Dec 2 09:29:49 CST 2004
OK, I am on this now, it is only a minor change.
Tim
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 10:57:41AM +0000, Piers O'Hanlon wrote:
> Hi Tim (and all),
>
> Firstly to let everyone know this document has finally passed through Public comment period and now has a few minor updates (see below) from the GGF Editors. Once these are made they have assured us it will be published.
>
> Tim (and potentially others editors) - if you could make the updates to your document and then resubmit it that would be great.
>
> Let me know if there are any problems.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Piers O'Hanlon
> --------------
> GGF IPv6-WG CoChair
>
> ------- Forwarded Message
>
> Return-Path: <sf-httpd at forge.gridforum.org>
> Received: from vscan-c.ucl.ac.uk by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with UK SMTP
> id <g.17326-0 at bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:21:03 +0000
> Received: from sourceforge.ggf.org ([140.221.9.79] helo=forge.gridforum.org)
> by vscan-c.ucl.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CWJjt-0004wx-Cq
> for P.OHanlon at cs.ucl.ac.uk; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:20:41 +0000
> Received: from sf-httpd by forge.gridforum.org
> with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (SourceForge)) id 1CWKY9-0007HA-00
> for <P.OHanlon at cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:12:37 -0600
> To: P.OHanlon at cs.ucl.ac.uk
> Subject: [ggf-editor | Submit GGF Draft - 981] Guidelines for IP version
> independence in GGF specifications
> Reply-To: followup-981 at forge-tracker.gridforum.org
> From: Sourceforge Tracker Monitor <noreply at forge.gridforum.org>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Message-Id: <E1CWKY9-0007HA-00 at forge.gridforum.org>
> Sender: sf-httpd <sf-httpd at forge.gridforum.org>
> Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:12:37 -0600
> X-UCL-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the UCL Helpdesk,
> helpdesk at ucl.ac.uk for more information
> X-UCL-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> X-MailScanner-From: sf-httpd at forge.gridforum.org
>
>
> Greg Newby changed 981 on 2004-11-22 11:12:36
>
> Status has changed: - New: 'Pending Info from Authors' Old: 'Final Editor Review'
> Priority has changed: - New: '2' Old: '1'
> Assigned To has changed: - New: 'Peter Clarke' Old: 'Greg Newby'
>
>
> Respond by visiting: https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=414&aid=981&group_id=90 (https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=414&aid=981&group_id=90)
>
> Summary: Guidelines for IP version independence in GGF specifications
> Project: EDITOR
> Tracker: Submit GGF Draft
> Artifact ID: 981
> Category: Informational
> Group: DATA
> Status: Pending Info from Authors
> Resolution: Returned to Authors/Group
> Priority: 2
> Last Modified By: Greg Newby
> Last Modified: 2004-11-22 11:12:36
> Submitted By: Piers O'Hanlon
> Submit Date: * 2004-07-20 02:12:58
> Assigned To: Peter Clarke
> File(s): draft-ggf-ipv6-ip-independent-guide-00b-brian-14-7-04.doc
> Description:
> This IPv6 Working Group document has passed working group last call. It has been read by the ADs and a small number of other WG chairs.
> - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Comment By: Greg Newby (2004-11-22 11:12:36)
> Per email from Piers: Yes, please go ahead and make the minor change to the IPv6 address size:
>
> >>>Regarding the IP version independence guidelines doc, the longest possible
> >>>IPv6 address is not 39 characters like
> >>>
> >>>0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000
> >>>
> >>>rather it can be
> >>>
> >>>0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:ffff:123.123.123.123
> >>>
> >>>which is 50 characters.
>
> Other changes to apply (these are all minor):
> - - Insert current date in p1 header
>
> - - Work through the document looking at all occurrences of the word "should." Generally, this should be changed to a different word or phrase ("the authors recommend..." or "for compatibility, developers might..."). This is to make sure "should" is not ambiguous compared to its use in a specifications document. You don't need to change every "should," but please change those that can without needing to perform verbal gymnastics.
>
> - - since the table of contents spans pages, go ahead and start it at the top of the 2nd page (leaving blank space after the abstract on the first page)
>
> - - spell out IPv6 and IPv4 on first use, i.e., "the Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)". Also spell out GGF, WG, IETF and any other acronyms on first use.
>
> - - remove extra hard return prior to 5.6
>
> - - Section 7, security: I think it's worthwhile mentioning at least two items here. One is the role of IPsec, which is mentioned earlier. Seems to me that security-conscious developers might choose IPv6 in order to use IPsec. Second is to mention the possible dangers of failure by developers to account for the possibility of either protocol being used. Whether to mention these or other security items is up to you, but from my point of view these are security considerations that are worth mentioning.
>
> Thanks for your work on this document! Once you have addressed the above (either by responding or going ahead with changes), upload the final document as a .doc and it will be published.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Comment By: Greg Newby (2004-11-04 15:57:19)
> Per email from Piers, I will provide a little editorial feedback, then will go ahead and approve these information documents for publication (tracker #981 & 982).
> - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Comment By: Greg Newby (2004-11-02 09:10:59)
> gbn: Sent email to Piers O'Hanlon requesting his feedback on the effectiveness of public comment for this and associated document #982. Status changed to Awaiting Author Feedback.
> - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Comment By: Stacey Giannese (2004-09-28 12:42:50)
> No comments have been made regarding this document so it will re-enter public comment period again.
>
> Due date: 10-28-04.
> - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Comment By: Stacey Giannese (2004-08-13 07:47:10)
> Document will now enter 30 day public comment period.
>
> Due date: 9-13-04
> - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Comment By: Charlie Catlett (2004-08-12 13:19:15)
> This draft has completed the necessary steps prior to
> being made available for public comment. Authors,
> working group / research group chairs, and Area
> Directors should encourage individuals to participate
> in the public comment process and should announce
> the public comment availability to appropriate
> communities and groups.
>
> Public comments can be viewed and submitted via
> the GridForge Editor pages (see Forums) or:
>
> http://www.ggf.org/documents
>
> Public comments play an important part in the advancement
> of a GGF draft and publication as a document in the
> GGF document series.
>
> An active public comment period strengthens the case
> that the document is a useful and desired work product
> for some community of consumers.
> - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> View the Submit GGF Draft : https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/index.php?func=browse&group_id=90&atid=414 (https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/index.php?func=browse&group_id=90&atid=414)
>
> ________________________________________
> Modify your monitoring preferences: https://forge.gridforum.org/monitoring/monitorPreference.php (https://forge.gridforum.org/monitoring/monitorPreference.php)
> Turn off monitoring for this Tracker: https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/?group_id=90&atid=414&aid=981&func=monitor (https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/?group_id=90&atid=414&aid=981&func=monitor)
>
> ------- End of Forwarded Message
>
>
--
Tim
-------
Via the GGF IPv6-WG mailing list
More information about the ipv6-wg
mailing list