Re: Last Call: 'Considerations on the IPv6 Host density Metric' to Informational RFC (draft-huston-hd-metric)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 02:52 PM 4/06/2006, Steven Blake wrote:
> Your representation as to the document's conclusions is simply not
> supported by the document itself.

Geoff,

I don't understand why you think my paraphrase of your document's
conclusions (including the quoted text above) is unfair or inaccurate.

I am pointing out (again) that the document did not recommend the adoption of any particular HD ratio value. It is possible that it may be of some value at this point to read through the document once more in order to appreciate precisely what is in the document and also to appreciate what is not in the document, as your comments relating to overall address consumption and sending "messages" to providers, wrong or otherwise, appear to be based on material that is simply not contained in this document. It is not altogether clear to me how your comments are to be considered in the context of an IETF last call on this particular document in the context of the IETF process.

regards,

     Geoff





_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]