Re: W.G. Last Call on "IPv6 Multihoming with Route Aggregation"

[Niels M�ller]

Ben Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Pending any description of how this draft provides *any*
> technical benefit (for example, what situations it covers
> which cannot be accomplished for efficiently and effectively
> with the RFC2260-based proposal), I am strongly against
> this draft moving forward.

I'm I bystander here, but as far as I can see, it appears that some
people like the approach, and really want to try it out. Then it ought
to be a good thing to have it published so that both people
implementing it and people shooting it down can have a clear
description to refer to. After all, we're talking about an
_informational_ rfc, not standards track.

Regards,
/Niels
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------