On Dec 16, 2009, at 10:23 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:
On 2009-12-16, at 10:55, JP Vasseur wrote:
Yes you are right, that rings a bell. That said, I think that with
the
added text, this should be clear now.
So if we changed it to "overload" in the earlier documents, wouldn't
it make sense to make the same change here for consistency?
OK no pb, we only use the "term" overload (in rev 07).
Thanks.
JP.
Lars_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf