[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Proposed way forward with the transition mechanisms

To: Soliman Hesham <H.Soliman@flarion.com>
Subject: RE: Proposed way forward with the transition mechanisms
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 08:23:17 +0300 (EEST)
Cc: "Karim El-Malki (AL/EAB)" <karim.el-malki@ericsson.com>, "Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki) " <jonne.soininen@nokia.com>, <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <F4410B91C6CC314F9582B1A8E91DC928BEECEA@ftmail2000>

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004, Soliman Hesham wrote:
>  > And remember, ISATAP -- as implemented -- is going to be published as
>  > Experimental RFC even if it didn't go for Standards Track 
> 
> => "As implemented"? or do you mean "as documented"? I hope
> we're not deciding this based on what we think implementations
> will do.

The ISATAP spec, submitted to the RFC-editor, is supposed to describe 
ISATAP as it has been implemented by the people.   If that isn't 
correct, the spec needs to be fixed.

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

References:
- RE: Proposed way forward with the transition mechanisms
  - From: "Soliman Hesham" <H.Soliman@flarion.com>

Prev by Date: RE: draft agenda for v6ops at IETF60
Next by Date: Re: Proposed way forward with the transition mechanisms
Previous by thread: RE: Proposed way forward with the transition mechanisms
Next by thread: RE: Proposed way forward with the transition mechanisms
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread