Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 01:09:08 +0900
From: JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| and asked if the usage specified in the "other documents" is an
| implementation requirement or not.
Sorry, I'm still not understanding. An implementation requirement
of what? Addressed to whom?
Clearly what 2464 says includes requirements upon implementations of
2464. I don't think 2374 really requires much of anyone, it just
(attempts to anyway) tell the registries (and sub-registries, etc)
how to allocate addresses.
I don't think they're directly related to the addr arch doc though?
Or not to the current issue anyway.
The quote from Thomas in your earlier mail was just his attempt to
use 2464 (etc) as demonstrations that 64 bit IIDS had been implemented
as specified by addr arch (interpreting addr arch as a specification for
RFC writers, rather than anyone else). They wouldn't be relevant, even
if this was reasonable, as they don't actually specify what Thomas was
hoping or assuming that they do, and so don't further his argument.
The whole rest of the community can just ignore that little bit of by-play
I think.
kre
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
