> However, advocating or hoping to deal with NAT > or anything else by appealing to the IETF's change control authority is > worse than a distraction, because people outside The Standards Process > see it as obviously silly and useless. yes but I was making that argument to folks who *are* inside the IETF, rather than to folks on the outside. I agree with you that most vendors don't give a d*mn about who has change control over the internet standards...most feel quite free to abuse them (and harm interoperability) at the whim of a marketroid. NATs are a good example of this, but hardly the only one. Keith
- "redesign[ing] the architecture of the... Sean Doran
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... Keith Moore
- Re: "redesign[ing] the archit... Dave Crocker
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... Eliot Lear
- Re: "redesign[ing] the archit... Keith Moore
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... Vernon Schryver
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... Vernon Schryver
- Re: "redesign[ing] the archit... Keith Moore
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... Eliot Lear
- Re: "redesign[ing] the archit... Keith Moore
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... Peter Deutsch in Mountain View
- Re: "redesign[ing] the archit... Keith Moore
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... Bob Braden
- Re: "redesign[ing] the architectu... narakamath
