IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pppext] Proposal to solve ML-PPP ambiguity

James Carlson <carlsonj@workingcode.com> Fri, 27 May 2011 11:44 UTC

Return-Path: <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
X-Original-To: pppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93BEEE06C2 for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 May 2011 04:44:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FigxZe09ENu1 for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 May 2011 04:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carlson.workingcode.com (carlsonj-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1d9::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85EE3E068F for <pppext@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 May 2011 04:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [75.150.68.97] (carlson [75.150.68.97]) (authenticated bits=0) by carlson.workingcode.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4RBiXXA024956 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 27 May 2011 07:44:34 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4DDF8EA1.1060004@workingcode.com>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 07:44:33 -0400
From: James Carlson <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100214 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vernon Schryver <vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com>
References: <201105262155.p4QLtEts095281@calcite.rhyolite.com>
In-Reply-To: <201105262155.p4QLtEts095281@calcite.rhyolite.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-DCC-Misty-Metrics: carlson; whitelist
Cc: pppext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pppext] Proposal to solve ML-PPP ambiguity
X-BeenThere: pppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PPP Extensions <pppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pppext>
List-Post: <mailto:pppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 11:44:48 -0000

On 05/26/11 17:55, Vernon Schryver wrote:
>> From: James Carlson <carlsonj@workingcode.com>
>> To: Vineet kumar Garg <vineet.garg@aricent.com>
>> Cc: "pppext@ietf.org" <pppext@ietf.org>
> 
>> For what it's worth, although I agree that an implementor's guide might
>> be helpful,  
> 
> What's wrong with the existing implementors' guides?  I thought at
> least this one mentioned that de facto standard tactic for handling
> MP misconfiguration:

I meant an Informational or perhaps Best Practices RFC describing MP
implementation issues.  I was trying to redirect away from
protocol-level fixes and towards documentation fixes.

Yeah, I could have suggested googling ... but I was trying to walk a
fine line about my own work.  (For what it's worth, I no longer get a
penny out of it.  :-/)

-- 
James Carlson         42.703N 71.076W         <carlsonj@workingcode.com>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email