RE: PPP IPV6 Control Protocol Extensions for Prefix

"Glen Zorn" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.pppext
Organization Cisco Systems
Message-ID <[email protected]>
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> writes:

>> I don't think that one should be published, either.  RFC 1877 wasn't
>> a good thing, and I don't think we're doing anyone any favor
>> extending it into IPv6.
> 
> This is especially true since WINS doesn't even exist for IPv6. Why
> define a protocol to configure something that isn't even supported? 

I think that it would be a good thing, if possible, to raise the level
of discussion about our draft above the level of blind ideology.  I also
think it would be a good idea if the people making these ideological
arguments would actually read the document (WINS is not even mentioned
therein).

~gwz

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither..." 
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

"It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless
they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets." 
-- Voltaire
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.