On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:35:15 -0700 Fred Templin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Folks - do we have consensus to accept this document as an > IPv6 wg item (see below)? what does it mean to do this? if it means we generally support the requirements, I say no. if it means we are going to try to refine these into a set of requirements we can agree on, I am still dubious. it if just means that we allow the document to be renamed draft-ipv6-* then it doesn't bother me too much one way or the other. but I think we should leave the door open for other attempts at drafting sets of design considerations. and we should probably not call them requirements in any case. Keith -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
