Fred Templin wrote:
Folks - do we have consensus to accept this document as an IPv6 wg item (see below)?
I'll admit to some process fuzziness here, so I'm not quite sure what's being asked. If we are being asked that we agree with the content of the document, I'd have to say on the whole at least: not yet. If you want a requirements draft, write requirements and don't wander into the solution space. If you want a solutions draft, that's okay too. Just don't call it a requirements document.
Eliot
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
