Softwire Hub and Spoke Deployment Framework with Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Version 2 (L2TPv2)
RFC 5571

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 13 and is now closed.

(Ralph Droms) Yes

(Mark Townsley) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

Comment (2009-01-15 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
> If Framed-IPv6-Prefix is not present but Framed-IPv6-Pool is, the SC
> must choose a prefix with that pool to send RAs.

from that pool?

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

Comment (2009-01-14 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
Very clear document. Two minor comments:

Section 1., paragraph 1:
>    The Softwires Working Group has selected Layer Two Tunneling Protocol
>    version 2 (L2TPv2) as the phase 1 protocol to be deployed in the
>    Softwire "Hubs and Spokes" solution space.  This document describes
>    the framework for the L2TPv2 "Hubs and Spokes" solution, and the
>    implementation details specified in this document should be followed
>    to achieve interoperability among different vendor implementations.

  Referring to WGs and their decision process in RFCs isn't terribly
  useful, because WGs are ephemeral. I'd suggest to rephrase this to
  talk about the technology itself.

Section 4., paragraph 0:
> 4.  Standardization Status
>    This section groups various Internet standards documents and other
>    publications used in Softwires.

  I don't understand the purpose of this section. Is this supposed to be
  a reading list of related work, provided for the convenience of
  implementors? If so, the section title is confusing.

(Pasi Eronen) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(Chris Newman) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) No Objection

(Tim Polk) (was No Record, Discuss) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) (was Discuss) No Objection

Magnus Westerlund No Objection

(David Ward) Recuse