I mean no disrespect. What I meant by that post was that I look forward to reading something along the lines of: ----8<---- 1. I believe RA should be moved to HISTORICAL status because of the following concerns: 2. A better way to provide routing information to host systems would be: ----8<---- This would be far more productive than arguing line-by-line against other statements without presenting what exactly it is that your arguing in favor of. Give us the big picture. After reading some of your work on end-to-end multihoming, I think I understand some of what you're trying to say. My problem is that while you seem to have a very strong academic understanding of networking, you seem to be ignoring operational realities in implementation. On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Ray Soucy <rps@maine.edu> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
No counter argument possible against such abstract nonsense.
Yes. That was my point.
-- Ray Soucy
Epic Communications Specialist
Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526
Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/
-- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/