Re: Introducing draft-6man-addresspartnaming

Scott Schmit <i.grok@comcast.net> Fri, 15 April 2011 00:17 UTC

Return-Path: <i.grok@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E48DE06E8 for <ipv6@ietfc.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:17:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KJvLjPAzRfv9 for <ipv6@ietfc.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.27.243]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC5BE05F5 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omta21.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.88]) by qmta13.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id XcDQ1g0071u4NiLADcHG0a; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:17:16 +0000
Received: from odin.ulthar.us ([68.33.77.0]) by omta21.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id XcHF1g00B00PQ6U8hcHG7R; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:17:16 +0000
Received: from odin.ulthar.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by odin.ulthar.us (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p3F0HEhS025580 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:17:14 -0400
Received: (from draco@localhost) by odin.ulthar.us (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p3F0HDPg025578 for ipv6@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:17:13 -0400
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:17:13 -0400
From: Scott Schmit <i.grok@comcast.net>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Introducing draft-6man-addresspartnaming
Message-ID: <20110415001713.GA22852@odin.ulthar.us>
Mail-Followup-To: ipv6@ietf.org
References: <BANLkTik=FRQyL8HpH_OCVv+xnVbv9MO5Fg@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=kE0Q6xzOEYCqrifN=oOOj4vwFeg@mail.gmail.com> <4DA76003.4050001@dougbarton.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4DA76003.4050001@dougbarton.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:17:18 -0000

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 01:58:43PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 04/14/2011 13:23, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >after renaming to draft-hartmann-6man-addresspartnaming, I am still
> >waiting for feedback.
> >
> >
> >I am not sure how the exact procedures are: Does lack of feedback mean
> >people are mostly OK with this or that no one cares?
> 
> To be painfully honest, most likely the latter, sorry. I've never
> had a problem with "field" as the description, and have never been
> confused because that's not a unique term. I agree with Karl that
> hextet is right out. I actually like the term quibble, because of
> (rather than in spite of) its alternate meaning, given how
> contentious various elements of v6 design have been, and continue to
> be. (It also rhymes with nibble.)

I happen to agree. I don't see the point. After all, what are the
numbers between the dots in IPv4 addresses called?

-- 
Scott Schmit