Le 27/03/2014 22:40, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) a écrit :
On 3/27/14 2:26 PM, "Jouni Korhonen" <jouni.nos...@gmail.com> wrote:
You know that it just happens to be the only RFC even attempting
to explain how LMAs are selected dynamically. If the reference here
is contentious, I am happy to remore it.. just give me alternative
text.
I agree. RFC6097 and RFC6463 are relevant to the above work item.
I am not sure where these two RFCs appeared from, I dont remember seeing
any discussion about them. Clarification please?
I suppose work on anchor selection would need a form of problem
statement - is there a problem statement in the current drafts?
It is possible the WG may (most likely) adopt newer approaches for
gateway selection, but a reference to the prior work is very much
relevant. It is a very relevant reference. We do want to leverage
work where possible. I'm fine with this.
I agree with these affirmations.
Alex
Regards Sri
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list
dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
dmm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
