Re: RFC 2553 bind semantics harms the way to AF independence

[Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino]

>we did suggest that there be no default for v6only (in fact I suggested
>it) and no one on either side wanted that.  thinking was even if one did
>not get their choice then its better to have default for the users.

        sorry to be picky.  is it correct that "no one on either side wanted
        that"?  Dave Thaler and i preferred "no default" at some point.

>in fact it was about 6 to 3 ratio in favor of v6only not being the
>default.  or if there were 9 people only 3 wanted what you want.

        at least the sentence conflict with the above "no one".

itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------