Subject: [conex] partial deployment in draft-mathis-conex-abstract-mech-00

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 18:35:19 +0800

In draft-mathis-conex-abstract-mech-00 it says that "the conex signal  
SHOULD be useful under only a partial deployment." Shouldn't that  
SHOULD be a MUST based on the charter text? From the charter:

"However, the CONEX WG will initially focus on one use case, where the  
end hosts and the network that contains the destination end host are  
CONEX-enabled but other networks need not be."

Alissa

---

From: Bob Briscoe <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 01:38:44 +0800

Alissa,

In an ideal world, all the requirements would be MUSTs, but we know 
we may have encoding constraints that mean we have to compromise some 
requirements. We didn't want to tie the w-g down.

Bear in mind this doc is aiming to grow up into an RFC that should be 
timeless. Therefore, it should not just reflect the current charter, 
but also potential re-chartering.

Given we ought to one day think about a v4 encoding too, we might 
need to allow ourselves more leeway than with v6 (or the difficulty 
might be the other way round!).

Bob

At 02:35 07/11/2010, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>_______________________________________________
>conex mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/conex

________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe,                                BT Innovate & Design