IETF conflict review for draft-templin-v6ops-isops
conflict-review-templin-v6ops-isops-00

The following approval message was sent
From: The IESG
To: "Nevil Brownlee" , draft-templin-v6ops-isops@tools.ietf.org
Cc: The IESG , , 
Subject: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-templin-v6ops-isops-18

The IESG has completed a review of draft-templin-v6ops-isops-18
consistent with RFC5742.


The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Operational Guidance for
IPv6 Deployment in IPv4 Sites using ISATAP'
as an Informational RFC.


The document provides implementation an operational advice for users or
implementers of rfc 4214/5214. The document was proposed as a v6ops
activity however the chairs determined that there was not a critical mass
of interest in taking on isatap work. The document does not intend to
update or obsolete rfc 5214.

The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work discussed
previously in WG v6ops, but this relationship does not prevent
publishing.

The IESG would also like the RFC-Editor to review the comments in the
datatracker related to this document and determine whether or not they
merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the
ballot and the history log.

The IESG review is documented at:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-templin-v6ops-isops/

A URL of the reviewed Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-v6ops-isops/

The process for such documents is described at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary

[Ballot comment]


- The title and text read a bit like a BCP, I assume that's ok
with OPS folks, in which case its ok for me.

- Figure 1: you could explain a bit more about where the value
5efe comes from in the text after the figure.  (Maybe that's
obvious to someone who knows ISATAP, but that someone is not
me:-)

The draft draft-templin-v6ops-isops-18
is ready for publication from the Independent Stream.
Please ask IESG to review it, as set out in RFC 5742.

The following is some background for this draft, please forward it
to IESG along with this request ...

Its abstract says:

Many end user sites in the Internet today still have predominantly
IPv4 internal infrastructures. These sites range in size from small
home/office networks to large corporate enterprise networks, but
share the commonality that IPv4 provides satisfactory internal
routing and addressing services for most applications. As more and
more IPv6-only services are deployed, however, end user devices
within such sites will increasingly require at least basic IPv6
functionality. This document therefore provides operational guidance
for deployment of IPv6 within predominantly IPv4 sites using the
Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol (ISATAP).

Ron Bonica has reviewed it for me, and says it's technically OK.

Thanks, Nevil (ISE)

--
Nevil Brownlee (ISE), rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org