Re: on the point of mobility & multihoming

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

Brian E Carpenter;

> > Dave and Geoff completely misunderstand the relationships
> > between M6 and MIP.
> >
> > Worse, they don't recognize that shim layer approaches are
> > making the the IP layer connection oriented by let it maintain
> > states of connections.

> Please do not over-simplify and please do not personalize this
> discussion.

You over-simplify and personalize the discussion. Don't to that.

The over-simplification, for example, is to just say "state"
even though the text you quoted says "states of connecitons".

It is interprested as an intentional rude behaviour, regadless
of whether you said "please" several times.

> We all understand, I assume, that site
> multihoming implies state.

You are lying of the worst lie to state the half truth.

The proper statement on state is that "multihoming for connection
implies states of connections".

> The architectural analysis is not supposed to *define* the solution,

Thank you for acknowledging you are doing nothing other than
abstract nonsense on impossible options.

> > Geoff's presentation is nothing more than rhetorical combinations
> > of layers without analyzing architectural implications.

> Please do not insult our colleague.

It is a proper critic on a presentation of someone who you
yourself choose.

If the quality of document or presentation from the person you
yourself choose, it is perfectly OK to say the document or
the presentation is poor with reasons such as "hetorical
combinations of layers without analyzing architectural
implications".

> > Ignore their documents.

> Please do not make such rude statements on this mailing list.

You are rude.

You give any technical point, save for the half truth above.

							Masataka Ohta