I mean no disrespect. What I meant by that post was that I look forward to reading something along the lines of:
----8<---- 1. I believe RA should be moved to HISTORICAL status because of the following concerns: 2. A better way to provide routing information to host systems would be: ----8<---- This would be far more productive than arguing line-by-line against other statements without presenting what exactly it is that your arguing in favor of. Give us the big picture. After reading some of your work on end-to-end multihoming, I think I understand some of what you're trying to say. My problem is that while you seem to have a very strong academic understanding of networking, you seem to be ignoring operational realities in implementation. On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Ray Soucy <r...@maine.edu> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Masataka Ohta > <mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote: >> No counter argument possible against such abstract nonsense. > > Yes. That was my point. > > > > > -- > Ray Soucy > > Epic Communications Specialist > > Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 > > Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System > http://www.networkmaine.net/ -- Ray Soucy Epic Communications Specialist Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526 Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System http://www.networkmaine.net/
