2012/4/2 Rémi Després <[email protected]>

>
> Le 2012-04-02 à 11:16, Maoke a écrit :
>
>
>
> 2012/4/2 Rémi Després <[email protected]>
>
>>
>>   > it is flawed in both architecture and technical aspects,
>>
>> Which ones?
>>
>>
>>
>
> please refer to discussion mails
>
>
> I carefully read all emails addressed to me, plus most others, but don't
> understand that any flaw really exists in 4rd-u-06.
>

i am still in review on the version -06, but i have found something not
qualified (inconsistent semantics). on the other hand, this message is more
about progress rather than the technical details. if we have the BoF or new
working group for the unified header mapping, i'd love to keep discussion
there, with contributing my list of semantics/architecture/technical-detail
questions that i found during the review.


>
> Sorry if I am not as shrewd as I should be in your opinion.
>
>
> and also my real-time comments on 4rd-u presentation in the jabber room as
> a brief summary focusing on major points. - maoke
>
>
> Do you know where I could get access to these comments?
>

i guess we have the jabber log. but it is less informative. if the unified
header mapping wg or BoF is started, i will contribute a comprehensive, and
well-studied list of questions.

best,
maoke
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to