Hi Colin,
I agree with your points below.
Tom P.
> -Original Message-
> From: Colin Perkins [mailto:c...@csperkins.org]
> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 9:36 AM
> To: Gorry Fairhurst
> Cc: 'dccp' working group; Phelan, Tom
> Subject: Re: [dccp] Review
On 1 Sep 2010, at 09:17, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
...
- I see the value of the IANA-specified destination port for a
client server app using a NAPT, where the NAPT changes only the
src port as it leaves the client, and does this differently for
each sender address behind the NAPT. What is the
, August 31, 2010 2:42 PM
To: 'dccp' working group
Cc: Phelan, Tom
Subject: [dccp] Review in WGLC for draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap-02.txt.
I have read the latest version of this specification during the WGLC
and
believe this is an important topic to publish a document.
The current draft
t; Cc: Phelan, Tom
> Subject: [dccp] Review in WGLC for draft-ietf-dccp-udpencap-02.txt.
>
>
> I have read the latest version of this specification during the WGLC
and
> believe this is an important topic to publish a document.
>
> The current draft appears to have address
I have read the latest version of this specification during the WGLC and
believe this is an important topic to publish a document.
The current draft appears to have addressed issues I think were
important and would seem nearly ready for publication, however I do have
some queries, as listed bel
