Re: draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-03.txt

[Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


>>>>> "Sean" == Sean Doran <smd@ab.use.net> writes:
    Sean> This draft expires in one week on 30 October 2002.

  I guess that the draft has expired once already in June.
My scripts picked up the new copy from June 11th again, but didn't sort it
properly for me, so it looked like it was still expired.

    Sean> Have you read it?  Do you think it's ready?  Do you think it's not

  I have just re-read it from top to bottom, and I think that it is ready.

  I partially agree with Brian Carpenter - perhaps MUST should be removed.
I am do not feel strongly about this.

  There are a number of sections with significant outs - 3.2.3 - impact on
hosts in particular. I am concerned about this topic - I believe that the
degree of impact to end hosts is where we will decide upon a good vs
bad solution. I don't think that the wording of the requirements should
change here, just that this is where the contention will be.

]       ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine.           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQCVAwUBPbbYXYqHRg3pndX9AQHSJQQAwIuO5/OnjcXV9GL8FbNl0VPqNNehlCDi
AJrw/VXRz1+fb2BxUWEfAe4FARHoTFS3c+Q0sG+vXdOFZmsGup7fglRE6OiSYnOL
sh7b6Vk07YKVs9ZgEjYzXt4yIXoy63ctKzJdwWPuU7JqGsYCH0yA9Y7u89pO+Krp
AKT2eOgPj44=
=QNqV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----