Document: draft-ietf-6man-text-addr-representation-04
Reviewer: David L. Black
Review Date: February 2, 2010
IESG Telechat date: February 4, 2010

Summary:
This draft is on the right track, but has open issues, described
in the review.

Comments:
The draft provides recommendations for a canonical format for IPv6
addresses.

The open issue is that the draft only provides recommendations, and
does not tightly specify a canonical format.  A tight specification
of a canonical format would include at least one (and preferably
both) of:
	- An algorithm to test whether an IPv6 text address
		is in the canonical format
	- An algorithm to convert an IPv6 text address into canonical
		form.
Code or pseudo-code should be used, and note that the latter item
subsumes the former (a canonicalization algorithm makes no changes to
input that's already in the canonical format).  In the absence of
these elements, I'm not convinced that the draft defines an
interoperable standard that solves the problem.

This document is a good start - I think it's a fine requirements
document that would be appropriate to publish as an Informational RFC,
but I believe that more work is needed to produce a standards-track RFC
that specifies an interoperable representation.  If this document
is published in its current form, it should be edited slightly to
make it clear that it is only a requirements document.