[ipv6-wg] New version (or followup) of RIPE-501 document...

On 6/17/11 2:08 PM, Kostas Zorbadelos wrote:
> My personal preference is variant 2. Less text is good I think.

Agree to some extent...

What does one RFC means to procurement people and how they check if CPE 
fits the requirements? In this case procurement guy needs to interpret 
all requirements from one RFC instead of the given list.

still not sure...

> A more general question regarding this work is, would you consider "load
> balancers" as network elements that should be included?
> I know that load balancing can also be achieved at the application
> layer, but in the v4 world there are dedicated appliances that provide
> the functionality and are considered network infrastructure elements.

Interesting, we got this conversation with F5 guy in London this week.

Maybe we could :)

>
> Finally, since I don't have the technical expertise to thoroughly verify
> the lists of RFCs mentioned, a comment for the writing structure of the
> document. I can imagine that this is still work in progress but I find
> the document difficult to read with this structure. Certainly having a
> table of contents with sections and subsections will help.

Table of contents is coming in last version, but if community thinks in 
general that table of contents would help then we could make an effort 
and do it now...

/jan