Stig
After Jim told me that I missed his point, I went back through XNET 5.2
and 2553-bis and they are both very vague on the issue (not the fault of
2553-bis since it tryes to use the same wording as XNET 5.2). There is
nothing there that says it should be possible. There is nothing there
that says that this should NOT be possible either.
IMHO, this is yet another one of those ambiguities that needs to be clarified by
XNET (not the api draft).
-vlad
Stig Venaas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 11:29:12PM -0400, Jim Bound wrote:
> > Brian,
> >
> > Let me clarify. I think its crazy too. But what I was beaten in to
> > believe and I think XNET was too is that implementors want this?
>
> Yes, this sounds crazy to me as well. I can't see why someone wants
> this, I've also carefully checked the specs (also XNET) and I can't
> find anything saying this should be possible.
>
> Stig
>
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Vladislav Yasevich Tel: (603) 884-1079
Compaq Computer Corp. Fax: (435) 514-6884
110 Spit Brook Rd ZK03-3/T07
Nashua, NH 03062
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
