Itojun, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > 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.
it is a MUST implement, not MUST use. you might not be able to use it all the time. so we have bidirectional tunneling (when you cant/dont want to do Route Optimization or triangle routing). got it?? > 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 where did you get that idea from? Mobile nodes can have sessions with IPv6 nodes, which dont implement HAO. its there in the current spec. got it?? look at Robert Elz's answer. I dont have to say anything more. > 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. this is funny. the WG decides and Jari edits it in. maybe the WG chairs can clarify this to you. Vijay -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
