Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > An RFC specifying that would therefore have to declare itself to be
>> > an update of GRASP. I don't think this is a big deal. It would become
>>
>> I think that you mean, update of BRSKI rather than "update of GRASP".
> Possibly both, because GRASP already defines
> transport-proto = IPPROTO_TCP / IPPROTO_UDP
> IPPROTO_TCP = 6
> IPPROTO_UDP = 17
Ah right.
I just don't care... someone else decide and tell me what.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
