At Fri, 18 May 2007 21:01:14 -0400, Joe Abley wrote: > > > On 18-May-2007, at 15:27, Dow Street wrote: > > > On May 18, 2007, at 9:44 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > > > >> One of my objections is that this draft doesn't explain what it > >> does or why. This is an integral part of what we're trying to do > >> here, we can't relegate that part to some third order draft. And > >> why the rush? Implementers are going to do what they're going to > >> do regardless of the publication date of the resulting RFC. And > >> it's not like we didn't know the implications of source routing > >> before this. > > > > I agree. If this I-D is to deprecate a significant part of such a > > key RFC, it should explain why. The current text is exceeding > > sparse in this regard, and the relevant refs are mostly non- > > archival documents. > > So would work on a companion document outlining the problems with > source routing in general and RH0 in particular fill that gap > satisfactorily, in your opinion? >
I believe that a separate document is best, because I prefer the current, shorter, draft we have now. Best, George -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
