Hi Jouni, Thank you for the review. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Jouni Korhonen [mailto:jounikor@xxxxxxxxx] > Envoyé : mardi 10 janvier 2017 21:05 > À : ops-dir@xxxxxxxx > Cc : softwires@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-softwire-dslite- > multicast.all@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx > Objet : Review of draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-multicast-14 > > Reviewer: Jouni Korhonen > Review result: Ready > > I found no issues in this specification (not that I would be an expert > in multicast). > IDnits complain about one instance of lines with non-rfc3849-compliant > IPv6 addresses. That should be verified whether it actually is an > issue. [Med] We are using the documentation prefixes when appropriate: IPv4 and IPv6 addresses used in this example are derived from the IPv4 and IPv6 blocks reserved for documentation, as per [RFC6676]. The unicast IPv4 address of the above example is derived from the documentation address block defined in [RFC6890]. The instance idnit is complaining about is related to: 64:ff9b::/96. This one is not an issue. > > On the operations side, I am happy with the current deployment > considerations section content, and in general how some of the > deployment/operational aspects have been laid out in the document. > [Med] Thank you.