Re: minor point

"Beast (Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd)" <dee@skidrow.pa.dec.com> Mon, 28 December 1992 16:05 UTC

Message-Id: <9212281602.AA21489@skidrow.ljo.dec.com>
Reply-To: dee@skidrow.ljo.dec.com
To: kasten@ftp.com
Cc: dee@skidrow.ljo.dec.com, Evaluating the Next Generation <criteria@ftp.com>
Subject: Re: minor point
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 28 Dec 92 10:40:35 EST." <9212281540.AA22929@ftp.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 11:02:37 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "Beast (Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd)" <dee@skidrow.pa.dec.com>

I won't bother to press on this point as all proposals I know about in
detail (all except PIP) have the characteristic anyway.

Donald

From:  kasten@ftp.com  (Frank Kastenholz)
To:  dee@skidrow.ljo.dec.com
>Donald,

>I am not sure that this is necessary. I do not believe that everyone will
>change to IPv7 all at once. It would be a gradual process and you would
>apply for your IPv7 address when you want to change over.

> > Possibly a sub-item under ease of administration or the like: as
> > mandated in the IAB draft, any IPv7 address scheme needs to have all
> > of the IPv4 address space embedded in it so everyone does't have to
> > apply for new numbers all at once.
>--
>Frank Kastenholz

minor point Beast (Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd)
Re: minor point Frank Kastenholz
Re: minor point huston
Re: minor point Beast (Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd)
Re: minor point Beast (Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd)
Re: minor point Frank Kastenholz
Re: minor point Paul Tsuchiya