On 5/26/2016 1:55 AM, Xuxiaohu wrote: >> This document represents a step backwards, is useful only in more limited >> > environments, etc. > Thanks for confirming that this encapsulation is useful in limited > environment (i.e., Softwires networks). I never said what environment it was useful for, but clearly Softwires doesn't *need* this solution (they already have two that work).
In another post: >> However, you ignored the other issues that come up when this doc is >> considered >> for WG adoption - do we need it? > Not ignored. I just need to confirm whether it's worthwhile to be fixed in > practice (i.e., in the real target network environment) before fixing them. There's no point in fixing a flat on a car with a broken engine. There's also no point in continuing to discuss why. Joe _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
