Re: [Autoconf] WC consensus call for RFC5889 modifications(Fwd:Forgotone [Was: RFC 5889)

Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr> Wed, 11 August 2010 11:51 UTC

Return-Path: <emmanuel.baccelli@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ACF13A6844 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tkiXhy7VNVJq for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:51:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ey0-f172.google.com (mail-ey0-f172.google.com [209.85.215.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42DF93A682A for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:51:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eyb7 with SMTP id 7so4914314eyb.31 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=kzsweyI5iICMQGZVeglgnKTKvDluiyVhEuqBHPTCnU0=; b=DpV47uzbFKuuMahtDpxxY80/7j2mhg5nLIiV5fXGD5B7FXhT5F9GxhU2ijbIk7Tmn5 A6TUSkksDzU9UYt5lje8T7hV1tpDGH2MP+uFgim6pbJ0rn54tylW/lIkeS/P9xaQgaGb n10vbmpbsvpCy+iMa2Qrz69XTsyzDX/9Afnkg=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type; b=dkcSQeoK3x/Euz624u1AJlC5Yat5jrg97FdEMGvo3Dz9fUCCvvifyp2LZ8xPP36t+i UJIT3kTNnpeUznUNk47MYsDnUH/ybLYWpUtQP0PXGtSnIBpKkr+MHcFq0BWnqyMMJ+Jf FREpnZ5S0Tq5K7Z7hNOVJoINeRSrtT5ETBcz0=
Received: by 10.213.62.206 with SMTP id y14mr5722812ebh.34.1281527505577; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: emmanuel.baccelli@gmail.com
Received: by 10.14.37.4 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Aug 2010 04:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4C6040F6.2020109@earthlink.net>
References: <4C528979.7010006@oracle.com> <201008040756.04650.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> <4C596602.1060308@earthlink.net> <201008051039.03011.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de> <AANLkTikWgoUHeJsZwWDViVyavWXjvtLfffrosHPcCPya@mail.gmail.com> <4C5B3854.3050706@earthlink.net> <E2946D37-14F1-4DC0-94C3-DC4FE6A3BE79@thomasclausen.org> <4C5C3EC8.50009@earthlink.net> <AANLkTinJJuuAevrFBCLRyR6HWoc-_bEcEonTqnFNL41O@mail.gmail.com> <4C6040F6.2020109@earthlink.net>
From: Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:51:25 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: Zj9OiJ4A6x1u0238gmVoWbwJFho
Message-ID: <AANLkTikvdnAOfg9uccSvYeA3JeUYGgrBzx=miy36m71-@mail.gmail.com>
To: autoconf@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09f8c1c7cbd6987048d8adff5
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] WC consensus call for RFC5889 modifications(Fwd:Forgotone [Was: RFC 5889)
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 11:51:12 -0000

Hi Charlie,

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Charles E. Perkins <
charles.perkins@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Hello Emmanuel,
>
>
>   .......         You might check [from year 2001]:
>>
>>    www.cs.ucsb.edu/~ebelding/txt/autoconf.txt
>>
>
> What do you think about that?
>


> But, maybe more to the point, I know I have seen a
> good half-dozen distinct approaches to this problem.
>

I think this approach is interesting and should definitely be considered
with the half-dozen others you hint at, in parallel of the DHCP-based
approach that is aimed at. As far as I understood, this is the spirit of the
second item in the proposed charter.

Emmanuel