On Aug 10, 2012, at 12:56, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is useful, thanks for writing it down. Thanks. > I am not sure what the term "challenged network" really buys us. I did > not see the term "challenged network" actually used in RFC4838, but I > do understand that the DTN community used this term. My preference > would be to move the three bullets currently in 2.2.1 up to section > 2.2. and to collapse 2.2.1 into a note that simply explains that the > term "challenged network" has been used for a certain subset of > constrained networks as part of the DTN work. I was mostly trying to declare the really challenged networks out of scope and delegate to RFC 4838. Apparently I'll need to clarify this. Grüße, Carsten _______________________________________________ Lwip mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
