IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Thoughts on draft-yourtchenko-ra-dhcpv6-comparison

Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com> Mon, 16 December 2013 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <ayourtch@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF5F1AE078 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:06:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.439
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EdCtKXSjiA9B for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:06:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5B111AE073 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 09:05:59 -0800 (PST)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from stew-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rBGH5w8Z014300 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 18:05:58 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.61.167.202] ([10.61.167.202]) by stew-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rBGH5rgg003062; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 18:05:54 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:05:50 +0000
From: Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com>
X-X-Sender: ayourtch@ayourtch-mac
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <411BFDB9-101D-4FC5-9A81-35140F8F5643@nominum.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1312161627400.40639@ayourtch-mac>
References: <CAKD1Yr0evKjEEvErq3T=nU6_joat8duseraJJDZ4OHPK9NGWDA@mail.gmail.com> <D1A3AA08-F644-4C43-87DA-06028A781166@nominum.com> <alpine.OSX.2.00.1312161404260.40639@ayourtch-mac> <411BFDB9-101D-4FC5-9A81-35140F8F5643@nominum.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (OSX 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="0-2002645334-1387213554=:40639"
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Thoughts on draft-yourtchenko-ra-dhcpv6-comparison
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:06:03 -0000


On Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Ted Lemon wrote:

> On Dec 16, 2013, at 9:09 AM, Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@cisco.com> wrote:
>> When/if we discover that everyone's in violent agreement, we add them back. What do you think ?
>
> Sure.   I don't mean to pressure you to add or remove anything—I just 
> think it's worth mentioning substantive performance issues, of which 
> some exist.   It's definitely not worth listing anything that is 
> controversial—I think there are some known performance issues that 
> everybody agrees exist, and I think those are arguably worth mentioning.
>
>
> But if you think the document stands without them, that's fine with me too.
>

I think I made a mistake of adding too much at once, this was a good 
way to cut some of the more controversial parts, at least for now.

It's easy to re-add later if we find a clear wording that has consensus.

--a

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email