Subject: new issue: [LL35] Improve abstract

From: Erik Guttman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 16:39:50 +0100

We need to evaluate whether to make this change.

===========================================================================

Description of Issue  Improve abstract
Submitter Name  Ralph Droms
Submitter Email Address  [email-masked]
Date first submitted  20.10.03
Reference
Comment Type ['T'echnical | 'E'ditorial]  E
Priority ['S' Must fix | '1' Should fix | '2' May fix ]  1
Section  Abstract
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

While technically the Abstract is correct, I found the initial reference
to "configuration" confusing relative to the address assignment provided
by v4LL. I suggest editing the Abstract.

Lengthy description of problem:
Requested Change:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-zeroconf-ipv4-linklocal-10.txt

To participate in wide-area IP networking, a host needs to be
configured, either manually by the user or automatically from a
source on the network such as a DHCP server. Unfortunately, such
external configuration information may not always be available. It
is therefore beneficial for a host to be able to depend on a useful
subset of IP networking functions even when no configuration is
available. This document describes how a host may automatically
configure an interface with an IPv4 address within the 169.254/16
prefix that is valid for communication with other devices connected
to the same physical (or logical) link.

becomes

To participate in wide-area IP networking, a host needs to be
configured with IP addresses for its interfaces, either manually by
the user or automatically from a source on the network such as a
DHCP server. Unfortunately, such address configuration information
may not always be available. It is therefore beneficial for a host
to be able to depend on a useful subset of IP networking functions
even when no address configuration is available. This document
describes how a host may automatically configure an interface with
an IPv4 address within the 169.254/16 prefix that is valid for
communication with other devices connected to the same physical (or
logical) link.

---

From: "John C. Welch" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 11:02:27 -0600

> We need to evaluate whether to make this change.

I would say yes...it's clearer as to the specific configuration that is
happening, and clarity is always good.

john

-- 
"Keecking butt fahr gudness"
Baldur's Gate