Adam Machalek wrote:
> While it is clearly defined in the text of the draft, I would have > appreciated an Appendix with nothing more then a list of the relevent > RFCs/Drafts grouped into those 3 catagories. I agree. [If there is a special case where an RFC has parts that belong to different categories, we can list them as "RFC nnnn (partially)" on those categories.] Jari -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
