RE: Layer 3.5 is actually layer 4

["marcelo bagnulo" <mbagnulo@ing.uc3m.es>]

Hi Masataka,


> It should be noted that, during the discussion, no one have
> give any support for your sweeping statement that:
>
> 	The systems level argument for a layer 3.5 solution is that
> 	it can cover all cases, including ones we have not
> 	invented yet.

Just to state the obvious, I agree with this statement, and i guess that the
authors of the several so called 3.5 layer solution do too (some of them
have stated it clearly in some mails).

>
> So, it is simply that you withdraw your fallacy of layer 3.5 and
> the discussion is closed.
>
> To save bandwidth, you can do so silently by not responding this
> mail.

Please do not assume that silence means that people agree with you, assume
that people are just tired to continue endless discussions

Regards, marcelo