ron,
> I have just posted draft-bonica-special-purpose-05. I hope that this
> version addressed the issues that we discussed, off-line.
indeed it does. s/prefix/address block/ and s/routable/forwardable/
hits my two issues on the head. thank you.
it might be good if, now that these changes h
; To: 'Randy Bush'; IETF Disgust
> Subject: RE: draft-bonica-special-purpose-04.txt
>
> Hi Randy,
>
> It seems that we need one or both or the following:
>
> - a better title for the new column
> - a better definition to be associated with that colum
alf Of
> Randy Bush
> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 9:45 AM
> To: IETF Disgust
> Subject: draft-bonica-special-purpose-04.txt
>
> i remain confused. i am not being pedantic just to be a pita. i
> really worry that this document will be used to justtify strange
> broke
--On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:45 -0500 Randy Bush
wrote:
> i remain confused. i am not being pedantic just to be a pita.
> i really worry that this document will be used to justtify
> strange brokenness.
>
> from my 2012.11.29 message:
>...
>> e.g. 192.0.0.0/24 is neither routable nor glo
i remain confused. i am not being pedantic just to be a pita. i really
worry that this document will be used to justtify strange brokenness.
from my 2012.11.29 message:
> are the following definitions
>
>o Routable - A boolean value indicating whether a IP datagram whose
> destinati
