thanks Phil. this approach sounds good.

Vijay

Phil Roberts wrote:
> 
> Folks,
> 
>     this discussion doesn't seem to be going anywhere at the point.  Perhaps
> we
> can drop it?
> 
>     The decision of MUST/SHOULD is up to the working group to recommend in
> its
> spec, and Jari will reflect that decision when he produces the final spec.
> The consensus that has been recorded so far is MUST for HAO processing, MUST
> for
> BE processing, SHOULD for RO support (although it's not listed in the
> node/host/
> routers requirements section, 9.1 says it SHOULD be supported by all nodes).
> We'll
> look at the recent thread before determing whether the earlier consensus of
> MUST for
> HAO and BE processing are still intact.
> 
>     When MIP sends the spec up to the IESG for approval, we'll let the NG
> working
> group know the summary of the requirements that the MIP working group has
> recommended.
> 
> Phil
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 3:29 PM
> > To: Vijay Devarapalli
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] Re: HAO and BE processing will be mandated
> >
> >
> > >but I keep hearing from the KAME folks again and again
> > >"we already have IPv6 implementations which do not understand
> > >HAO, we dont want HAO mandated" (which makes no sense to me).
> >
> >       MUST for HAO is self-contradictory at best.  if HAO is
> > a MUST, we don't
> >       need bidir-tunnel (since it won't be used).  if we have
> > bidir-tunnel,
> >       HAO is okay with SHOULD.
> >
> >       i don't want a pie-throwing match, but it seems that
> > you want it...
> >       i keep hearing from you "we can ignore currently-deployed IPv6
> >       codebase" which is total nonsense (or total ignorance
> > of the current
> >       situation) to me.  IPv6 is not a toy in your lab any
> > more.  we have
> >       people depend on it, we have serious IPv6 commercial
> > network operation.
> >
> >       i suggest to leave the SHOULD/MUST decision to jari,
> > the main editor.
> >
> > itojun
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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]
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to