Re: RFC 1812, section 4.2.2.5

braden@isi.edu Mon, 18 September 1995 16:38 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13132; 18 Sep 95 12:38 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13128; 18 Sep 95 12:38 EDT
Received: from venera.isi.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa02393; 18 Sep 95 12:38 EDT
Received: from can.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22) id <AA15774>; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 09:15:58 -0700
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 1995 09:17:44 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: braden@isi.edu
Posted-Date: Mon, 18 Sep 1995 09:17:44 -0700
Message-Id: <199509181617.AA13234@can.isi.edu>
Received: by can.isi.edu (5.65c/4.0.3-4) id <AA13234>; Mon, 18 Sep 1995 09:17:44 -0700
To: tli@cisco.com
Subject: Re: RFC 1812, section 4.2.2.5
Cc: craig@aland.bbn.com, rreq@isi.edu


  *> 
  *> I'll also point out that interpretation 1 is inconsistent with the
  *> design of IPv6.
  *> 
  *> Tony
  *> 

Dumb question: how is it inconsistent?

Thanks,

Bob