Hi Al, On 03/08/2015 06:45, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote:
<big snip> > If we seek to identify several more distinctions for "packets of Type-P", > then I would prefer to update the RFC 2330 Framework Section 13 on > this topic, so it's more widely applicable and less IPv4-centric. > I'll take immediate steps to accomplish this update. Yes, I think that is much more constructive than trying to do it piecemeal in the 2679bis draft. Perhaps you can contrive to plant a "forward reference" to 2330bis here, by saying that future extensions of the "packets of Type-P" definition will apply. That would take care of all my issues in one go. Brian _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
