> -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Touch [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 12:29 PM > To: Xuxiaohu > Cc: Tom Herbert; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [nvo3] [Int-area] Fwd: New Version Notification for > draft-ietf-nvo3-gue-03.txt > > > > > On Jun 19, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Xuxiaohu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > There was a famous saying: " it's never too late to mend!" > > Let's start with the assumption that gue will happen and that udp-in-ip won't > as > either an RFC or a separate port.
Seems meaningless to make that assumption, IMHO. > Now, is there really something to mend? Yes, according to the motivation for GUE as described in section 7 of draft-ietf-nvo3-gue (i.e., being a generic UDP-based tunneling technology), it'd better to find a more suitable WG to pursue this work. Xiaohu > Or is this not really about gue? > > Joe > > > > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
