Document: draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-issues-07
Reviewer: Spencer Dawkins
Date: June 9, 2004

"Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet
engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?"

- Yes, especially as an Informational RFC. The topic is important.

- I note that there are more transition mechanisms running around in
v6ops than appear in this document (6over4 and Teredo are the only
ones included in this draft, I think). Maybe this could be explicitly
stated? "the other mechanisms don't add any new considerations",
"we're treating these as classes of transition mechanisms", "we
included mechanisms as of some date", etc. - whatever the reason was.

- An editing pass wouldn't hurt - there are enough sentence fragments
like

   Dynamic DNS with SLAAC simpler than forward DNS updates in some
   regard, while being more difficult in another.

to justify a proofreading review as well. I wouldn't mind doing that,
but not by telechat cutoff this week!