Re: Last Call: <draft-housley-number-registries-02.txt> (Internet Numbers Registries) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> Specific comments:
> 
> Section 2.1, second paragraph:
> 
>   The allocation and registration functions for all non-reserved AS
>   numbers are handled by the Internet Numbers Registry System in
>   accordance with policies developed by the Regional Internet
>   Registries (RIRs).
> 
> I might suggest:
> 
> "The allocation and registration functions for all non-reserved AS numbers are currently handled by the Internet Numbers Registry System in accordance with policies developed via the Regional Internet Registries' (RIRs) public policy development processes."
> 
> Section 2.2, first paragraph:
> 
>   The allocation and registration functions for all non-reserved
>   globally unique unicast IPv4 unicast addresses are handled by the
>   Internet Numbers Registry System in accordance with policies
>   developed by the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs).
> 
> Similar to the previous suggestion (dropping a redundant 'unicast'):
> 
> "The allocation and registration functions for all non-reserved globally unique unicast IPv4 addresses are currently handled by the Internet Numbers Registry System in accordance with policies developed via the RIRs' public policy development processes."
> 
> Section 2.3, second paragraph:
> 
>   The allocation and registration functions for all non-reserved
>   globally unique unicast IPv6 unicast addresses are handled by the
>   Internet Numbers Registry System in accordance with policies
>   developed by the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs).
> 
> Similar to the previous suggestion (also dropping a redundant 'unicast'):
> 
> "The allocation and registration functions for all non-reserved globally unique unicast IPv6 addresses are currently handled by the Internet Numbers Registry System in accordance with policies developed via the RIRs' public policy development processes."


In all three cases you are proposing to change "are handled" to "are currently handled"

Could you kindly explain the rationale for this proposed change in wording, as the subtle distinction between the two terms is, I'm afraid, somewhat lost on me.

regards,

   Geoff







[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]