Does DHCP require a change to the residential CPE James? How long is it going to take to change every residential router in the world? Do you think it is an unreasonable requirement to not have to do this? You can't just object to HELD on the basis that you think it's been misrepresented. I don't accept that it has - but in any case, it's not a technical rationale. Cheers, Martin -----Original Message----- From: James M. Polk [mailto:jmpolk@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, 20 April 2007 7:31 AM To: Dawson, Martin; John Schnizlein; Andrew Newton Cc: GEOPRIV WG; Allison Mankin; ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [Geopriv] Confirmation of GEOPRIV IETF 68 Working Group Hums At 04:20 PM 4/19/2007, Dawson, Martin wrote: >"DHCP is not adequate because it doesn't meet multiple sets of >requirements as documented multiple times ..." bologna "documented multiple times" means in individual submissions of which, zero facts were presented to substantiate If DHCP were so inadequate, why is the DSL forum now going to specify it? Why does PacketCable define it? These were fairly recent moves... And, how many times has HELD been presented as if it were a product of an IETF WG? James ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of this email is prohibited. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [mf2] _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf