Christian,
>> Michel Py wrote:
>> There many people, including some that actually _wrote_
>> the procedures, that disagree with you.
> Christian Huitema wrote:
> Please explain or retract. I was the note-taker during that
> particular session, and I don't recall ever stating that the
> chair's
> > Harald Tveit Alvestrand
> > But there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the WG made a
> > decision, and that the chairs were procedurally correct in
> > recording that decision as the outcome of the meeting.
>
> There many people, including some that actually _wrote_ the
procedures,
> that
Harald,
> Harald Tveit Alvestrand
> But there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the WG made a
> decision, and that the chairs were procedurally correct in
> recording that decision as the outcome of the meeting.
There many people, including some that actually _wrote_ the procedures,
that disa
Tony,
speaking only for myself:
I am saddened to see the length to which you are willing to go in
attempting to use process mechanisms to overturn a technical WG decision to
which you do not agree.
After reviewing the video, I personally concluded that *no matter what the
merits of the case*,
please ignore..
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
I am saddened that it has come to this, but the IESG action has simply
prolonged the process. The only clarity in their '...somewhere to the
left...' justification is their willingness to let personal technical biases
blind them to the process failure. As such, please consider this note to be
an ap
On donderdag, okt 9, 2003, at 19:58 Europe/Amsterdam, Bob Hinden wrote:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/metro-addr-slides-jul95.pdf
However this was never part of the spec AFAIR.
That is correct, it was never part of the IPv6 standards. I too
thought it was a nice approach.
In that c
At 10:39 AM 10/9/2003, Michel Py wrote:
> Bill Manning wrote:
> I remember them being considered. Steve Deering had
> this wonderful idea for metro-addressing.
Indeed, in 1995 when he was at parc. Here's a link:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/metro-addr-slides-jul95.pdf
However this was
> Bill Manning wrote:
> I remember them being considered. Steve Deering had
> this wonderful idea for metro-addressing.
Indeed, in 1995 when he was at parc. Here's a link:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/metro-addr-slides-jul95.pdf
However this was never part of the spec AFAIR.
Michel.
% > Brian Haberman wrote:
% > I do not recall geographic-based addresses ever being a
% > part of the IPv6 standards.
%
% I don't either.
I remember them being considered. Steve Deering had this wonderful
idea for metro-addressing.
% > Tony Hain has an individual ID that discuss
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:44:55 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Hi Chirayu,
>
> Thanks for the comments. The document has already passed WG last call
> and I am finalizing some text based upon AD review. I am uncomfortable
> about making major changes to the document at this point, unless there
> i
Hi Chirayu,
Thanks for the comments. The document has already passed WG last call
and I am finalizing some text based upon AD review. I am uncomfortable
about making major changes to the document at this point, unless there
is strong reason to do so & strong consensus in the WG.
> General comme
Title: unsubscribe
unsubscribe
Title: unsubscribe
unsubscribe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| Hi Leif,
|
| This message is a reply to the appeal that you filed on August 5, 2003
| regarding our management of the "site-local issue" (the full text
| of your message is included below).
I am happy with your reply to my a
15 matches
Mail list logo
