On 2011-02-23 10:18, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2011, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> But this text will be completely different in 3697bis. I really >> wouldn't want to set people off coding according to something that >> we already know will change. > > Ok, you're not saying that the text is plain confusing, but rather that > requirements are expected to be different and what we have so far > specified will be irrelevant or incorrect with the new spec.
Well, there is text that's confusing, but that discussion belongs on a flow label thread. > > I could see that argument, but in 3697bis we will already need to deal > with backward-compatibility with those implementations that behave > according to current standards, so I'm not sure how compelling it is. To all intents and purposes, there is no backwards compatibility problem because there are no implementations. But again, that belongs on another thread. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
