Francis,
>
> In your previous mail you wrote:
>
> > => I don't know if we can quickly reach a consensus. There is only one
> > rough proposal... and the time is not very good (holidays, 4th July
> > power down, etc). Do you believe we can do it before the cut-off?
> >
>
> Since I don't have any idea when the cut-off is since I won't be in London
>
> => 13 and 20th July.
>
> I don't know if we can make it or not.
>
> => this is tactics: if now we should split the document in order to have
> the easy part ready ASAP.
>
> If we don't try then will be right back here again six months from
> now dredging up old discussions that should have been concluded the
> last time.
>
> => I agree we are not in a hurry for the header stuff.
>
Making to these deadlines seems like a bad idea if the consequence will
be that we split off content that will then be completely and unnecessarily
redesigned thus rendering piles of existing code obsolete. The draft has
languished for two plus years I think. Another four months won't make a
difference. We should keep the document together in one piece and address
the existing problems, not speculative problems.
Rather than continuing with this meta discussion, why don't we move on to
the meat of getting the issues addressed.
tim
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
