Re: 3GPP and 'not touching a running system'

[Havard Eidnes <he@uninett.no>]

Hi, guys,

please allow myself to supply a remark on the style of the text in
this e-mail discussion: it really would make it so much easier for
those of us trying to follow the discussion from the sidelines if a
few simple and commonly accepted rules were adhered to with regard
to quoting of material:

1) please cut down on the included comments to narrow down to just
   what you are commenting on.  Adding 5 lines of your own text to 100
   lines of (recursively) included comments makes it unneccessarily
   hard to find the 5 new lines, especially in combination with
   violations of rule number 2 below.

2) it would make it much easier to follow the discussion if the
   commonly accepted quoting practice of "indent each line with '> '"
   was adhered to.  The alternative makes it Really Difficult to see
   who said what, as in

> This has nothing to do with 3GPP (except that it's done on top of v4
> 3GPP network), right?  The UE doesn't know anything of v6, and the 3GPP
> network doesn't know anything of v6.  The 3GPP operator is just acting
> as an IPv4 ISP, offering tunneled v6 service for folks using its private
> v4 addresses?
>
> => yes. But the operator has to place the tunnel server in its Gi
> backbone because he is generally using private IPv4 address space and
> the user cannot use a tunnel server in the Internet therefore.
> Furthermore, the UE will probably soon also implement tunneling
> mechanism (we are asking SonyEricsson and Nokia to implement ISATAP in
> their handsets).

   Inserting an inconspicious "=>" at the front of a possibly
   multi-paragraph reply (just a single paragraph here, I'll
   concede) doesn't quite provide the same visual cues that the
   "indent every included line with '> '" does.

   And the message I'm replying to was signed:

> Regards
> Andreas
>
>
> -- 
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

Now, who wrote this?!? ;-)

I now return you to the discussion at hand.

Regards,

- Håvard