Mark Smith wrote > > If there are this many new drafts coming out in November 2003, even with a > > WG decision to not do NAT IPv6 then there should be a big red flag that > > there is a disconnect between what this WG says and what others are doing. > > > > I would prefer to say it the other way ... if your evidence is actual, it shows the other groups are disconnected with this one.
I agree, but either way there is a disconnect. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
