On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 13:34 +0000, Tim Chown wrote: > On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 01:33:29PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > > 8<----------------- > > Propose a new WG to write a new IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling protocol > > 1. Based on the tunneling requirements write one new protocol > > 2. Work on two components of the solution: > > a) method to discover the tunnel end-point > > b) specification of the tunnel set-up protocol > > ----------------->8 > > > > There are three components to "Tunneling", the third is the actual > > protocol, but you mention that in the first part, probably a rephrase > > would be better. > > I think the word "configuration" is missing up there... The 'set-up' is the configuration part, configuration is a bit clearer indeed on what really is happening. > "Propose a new WG to write a new IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling configuration > protocol" "Propose a new WG to define a IPv6 over IPv4 tunnel configuration protocol" Would be a better formulation IMHO. > The WG name would be something like v6tc WG Sounds reasonable to me. Greets, Jeroen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part