Looks good to me. Thanks again for addressing my comment. 

Regards,

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tore Anderson [

mailto:tore

 at redpill-linpro.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 11:27 AM
> To: Jari Arkko
> Cc: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); General Area Review Team; draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-
> eam.all at tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam-01
> 
> * Jari Arkko
> 
> > >    When translating a packet between IPv4 and IPv6, an SIIT
> > >    implementation MUST individually translate each IP address it
> > >    encounters in the packet's IP headers (including any IP headers
> > >    contained within ICMP errors) according to Section 3.3, except for
> > >    any address for which Section 4 explicitly states that the EAM
> > >    algorithm MUST NOT be used.
> >
> > I think this makes sense, and I at least feel this is better text than
> > the original. Thanks.
> 
> Hello Jari,
> 
> My co-author felt the above was a bit too "conjunction-overflowy", so we
> ended up with the following:
> 
>    Unless otherwise specified in Section 4, an SIIT implementation MUST
>    individually translate each IP address it encounters in the packet's
>    IP headers (including any IP headers contained within ICMP errors)
>    according to Section 3.3.
> 
> This is in draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam-02. I hope you see this too as an
> improvement over the original?
> 
> Tore