Dan,
Many thanks for all your feedback leading up to this
summary. I have two questions/comments related to the points you
listed:
- For point 1, do you envision any additional text
beyond a change in title (as you suggest in point 2) and the fact that the
Abstract explains that this is an update/complement to RFC2544?
[DR] A sentence in the Abstract or
Introduction section clarifying that IPv6 transition mechanisms are not
within the scope could help, but I do not insist on it.
- For point 2, I prefer the second option you
proposed because we don't introduce qualifiers such as "capable".
Also, what do you think of the following title: "IPv6 Benchmarking
Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices"? It would relate immediately to
RFC 2544's title and would be more generic.
[DR] This would be fine.
Thank you again for your help with this
work!
Best Regards,
Chip