Re: draft-ietf-multi6-multihoming-requirements-04.txt

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Ran;

> >  So if you could state in
> > which way you'd want the requirements to change, based on the current
> > situation, that would be good.
> 
> 	Restore the normative nature of the requirements document
> -- including changing "may/should/must" back to "MAY/SHOULD/MUST".

The problem is that the draft already contains mutually
exclusive requirements.

Requiring a requirement document is to suppress discussion.

It is a political way to autoritate an existing proposal, by a
list of requirements biased for the proposal.

Technically, it is harmful and, for problems related to multiple
areas of expertise, hopeless.

						Masataka Ohta