Thomas Narten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Does common sense play any role here? (I know, a lot to ask...) No, not in your sense. The "common sense" that plays a role is one which asks, "What is the cheapest fix, short term?" How hard would it be, for example, to include words similar or identical to RFC 791 Appendix B in RFC 2460bis? Or to revive the old I-D we saw that mentions this topic, keeping it as an independent RFC? Unless, of course, people now find that Appendix B to have been a mistake. > Next challenge (for those with time on their hands). How many other > IETF specs neglected to explicitely state the endianness of protocols? > (My prediction, a rather lot of them.) Followup: has it caused great > problems in practice? I'd bet not. Again, it has caused me problems. One of intererability, and the others of having to continue to remind people of RFC 791 Appendix B. The simple fact is, in IPv6 we no longer have that clear statement to use. Bert -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
