Hello Behcet,
On 11/4/2011 9:18 AM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
I am confused about all these very high level, intelligent looking comments, and I must say I am fed up with them :-).
- I'm guessing you don't wish to restrict to only stupid comments. - Do you mean that only low-level comments are of interest? That doesn't seem appropriate in response to the proposal to shut down the working group...?
Non-tunneled communications is already there in DMM. You connect to the nearest HA and all new communications is non-tunneled.
That doesn't provide IP address continuity, does it?
Do we agree that we should differentiate client-based and network based protocols and discuss them in different places?
If I understand your point, this is the status quo, right?
or even there is no issue for one.
I did not understand the point of that.
I think this is what we should decide now.
I'm not sure what "this" means in your sentence. Regards, Charlie P. _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
