Agreed. However, if it is mandatory then there is more of a leg to stand on in requiring it.
-----Original Message----- From: Pekka Savola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 8:50 To: Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 Cc: Jari Arkko; ipv6@ietf.org Subject: RE: Solicit comments on draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote: > Yes, but that is experimental so it is not mandatory to implement > either. So, again I say there is no mandatory way in which a network > management application can reliably discover IPv6 networks. This is > why the draft recommends making IND mandatory. Yes, so we get back to the main point. It's not really the IETF's business to mandate or not mandate certain protocols for implementation. If you put it as a requirement in your CFF's, you're likely going to get a better response. In other words, if you can convince the vendors and other users that a feature is really useful, it's going to be implemented... if you can't, then it's probably better than an IETF mandate which the vendors can (and _do_) ignore in any case. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
