On 2019-09-04 07:23, Templin (US), Fred L wrote:
> Bob,
> ...
> Paragraph #1 beginning "This document acknowledges" looks good, but then
> why include paragraphs #2 and #3 since 'intarea-tunnels' is the place to
> discuss
> IP-in-IP encapsulation. So, why not shorten Section 5.3 and have it as simply:
>
> 5.3. Packet-in-Packet Encapsulations
>
> This document acknowledges that in some cases, packets must be
> fragmented within IP-in-IP tunnels. Therefore, this document makes no
> additional recommendations regarding IP-in-IP tunnels.
> See [I-D.ietf-intarea-tunnels] for further discussion.
There was a reason this text was included up front - despite the
implications of this draft, IP-IP tunnels are not going anywhere anytime
soon. IPsec tunnel mode has not been deprecated.
To Bob's other point, this was approved by the WG and the IETF last call
as up front.
Why are we changing it now?
Joe
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
