Re: (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address allocation.
William Allen Simpson <bill.simpson@um.cc.umich.edu> Thu, 21 July 1994 05:01 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa23112; 21 Jul 94 1:01 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa23107; 21 Jul 94 1:01 EDT
Received: from Sun.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa24001; 21 Jul 94 1:01 EDT
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (zigzag.Eng.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (sun-barr.Sun.COM) id AA04359; Wed, 20 Jul 94 10:06:47 PDT
Received: from sunroof2.Eng.Sun.COM by Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21911; Wed, 20 Jul 94 10:06:58 PDT
Received: by sunroof2.Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01137; Wed, 20 Jul 94 10:07:43 PDT
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (engnews1) by sunroof2.Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01131; Wed, 20 Jul 94 10:07:36 PDT
Received: from Sun.COM (sun-barr) by Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03766; Wed, 20 Jul 94 10:05:19 PDT
Received: from merit.edu by Sun.COM (sun-barr.Sun.COM) id AA03976; Wed, 20 Jul 94 10:05:00 PDT
Received: from pm002-19.dialip.mich.net (pm002-19.dialip.mich.net [35.1.48.100]) by merit.edu (8.6.8.1/merit-1.0) with SMTP id NAA22435 for <sipp@sunroof.eng.sun.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 1994 13:04:57 -0400
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 1994 14:56:36 +0000
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: William Allen Simpson <bill.simpson@um.cc.umich.edu>
Message-Id: <2887.bill.simpson@um.cc.umich.edu>
To: sipp@sunroof.eng.sun.com
Subject: Re: (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address allocation.
X-Orig-Sender: owner-sipp@sunroof.eng.sun.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: sipp@sunroof.eng.sun.com
While I'm sure that this is a fine document (I've quoted from interesting parts of previous versions in the past), isn't this the same document that was used to premise a "requirement" that addresses be variable length? And isn't this the same Tony Li who last year stated he didn't support my SIPP plan for continental aggregation? Why the abrupt turn-about? There is a "'''Geographical ..." part, which is obviously incomplete. (It isn't even a complete sentence.) I can't find a substantive difference. Perhaps you could point out the changes for SIPP-16 for us, Yakov? Why should we clasp this viper to our buxom? Bill.Simpson@um.cc.umich.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ IETF SIPP Working Group - Archives: parcftp.xerox.com:/pub/sipp Unsubscribe: unsubscribe sipp (as message body, not subject) Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
- (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address alloca… yakov
- re: (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address al… Bob Hinden
- (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address alloca… yakov
- Re: (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address al… bound
- Re: (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address al… Peter S. Ford
- (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address alloca… yakov
- Re: (sipp) an architecture for SIPP-16 address al… William Allen Simpson