[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: ipng
Subject: Re: comments about draft-ietf-ipv6-privacy-addrs-v2-01
From: Fred Templin <osprey67 () yahoo ! com>
Date: 2004-11-11 11:35:33
Message-ID: 20041111113533.56987.qmail () web80507 ! mail ! yahoo ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 <jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp> wrote:
>> 2. Reference to ISATAP
(snip)
> That is why I moved it to informational ;-). I will also raise this
> at the WG meeting tomorrow as I see no proper way out of this. ISATAP will
> NEVER become a DS as it will be published as EXPERIMENTAL. So it is
> not just a question of delays. The question is whether this draft should
> acknowledge the existence of an experimental protocol.
The "easiest" resolution is to keep it informational. I personally
think it's irresponsible, but I won't necessarily make an objection to
that if the majority of wg accepts that.
Better yet, I think we should institute a new reference category: "Obfuscational"
to go with the existing "Normative" and "Informational". Obfuscational references
are those used to intentionally confuse the reader, as opposed to the other
categories which have confusion as an unadvertised side benefit.
BTW, every time I have mentioned the "I*" word on this list the chairs have
acted quickly and firmly to shut down the discussion, so I guess it's OK now?
Thanks - Fred
osprey67@yahoo.com
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<DIV><STRONG><EM>JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 \
<jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp></EM></STRONG> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq \
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> \
<P>>> 2. Reference to ISATAP<BR><BR>(snip)<BR><BR>> That is why I moved it \
to informational ;-). I will also raise this <BR>> at the WG meeting tomorrow as I \
see no proper way out of this. ISATAP will <BR>> NEVER become a DS as it will be \
published as EXPERIMENTAL. So it is <BR>> not just a question of delays. The \
question is whether this draft should <BR>> acknowledge the existence of an \
experimental protocol.<BR><BR>The "easiest" resolution is to keep it informational. I \
personally<BR>think it's irresponsible, but I won't necessarily make an objection \
to<BR>that if the majority of wg accepts that.</P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> \
<DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Better yet, I think we should institute a new reference \
category: "Obfuscational"</DIV> <DIV>to go with the existing "Normative" and \
"Informational". Obfuscational references</DIV> <DIV>are those used \
to intentionally confuse the reader, as opposed to the other</DIV> \
<DIV>categories which have confusion as an unadvertised side benefit.</DIV> \
<DIV> </DIV> <DIV>BTW, every time I have mentioned the "I*" word on this list \
the chairs have</DIV> <DIV>acted quickly and firmly to shut down the discussion, so I \
guess it's OK now?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks - Fred</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:osprey67@yahoo.com">osprey67@yahoo.com</A></DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR> </DIV>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic