Re: IANA blog article

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

 



Jari, you can’t be serious.  unlimited means -without- limit, not just the limits of your imagination.
Patrick,  perhaps more to the point, the ramifications (consequence analysis) of managing transitions between variable code/address realms.  
Its not just expansion, its flow between larger/smaller, and smaller/larger.
we are back to NAT/ALGs _again_

/bill
Neca eos omnes.  Deus suos agnoscet.

On 4January2014Saturday, at 1:31, Patrik Fältström <paf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> On 4 jan 2014, at 09:29, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>> One important change is that every future application protocol proposal should be required to have an effectively unlimited code space for assignment.
>> 
>> Agree.
> 
> I do not agree regarding the term "unlimited".
> 
> What is needed is that the specification do have a consequence analysis regarding expansion of use.
> 
>   Patrik
> 






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