Subject: Re: [MOBILE-IP] WG Last Call - draft-ietf-mobileip-mier-02.txt

From: Mohamed Khalil <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 11:33:11 -0600

Hi Charlie,

Your two comments has been taken in consideration in
draft-ietf-mobileip-mier-02.txt.

Thx
MK

Nortel Networks
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles E. Perkins [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2000 11:04 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [MOBILE-IP] WG Last Call - draft-ietf-mobileip-mier-02.txt

Hello Basavaraj,

I find two parts of the draft to be objectionable.

1. The length field is misaligned.

2. There may be future extensions that do NOT need to
   correspond to the format suggested in the draft.
   Therefore, I would like to see the mandatory
   requirement for conformance relaxed.

Regards,
Charlie P.

[email-masked] wrote:
>
> We would like to issue a WG last call on the Mobile IP Extensions
> Rationalization (MIER) draft (draft-ietf-mobileip-mier-02.txt).
> Please provide your comments and feedback within the next two weeks.
>
> WG Last call issued on : Feb 9th, 2000
>
> -Basavaraj Patil

---

From: "Charles E. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 09:52:15 -0800

Hello Khalil,

Thanks for pointing me to the right draft.  When I checked with
the Internet Drafts search page, I saw _two_ MIER drafts.  One
was ...-02.txt, and the other was ...-03.txt.  I looked at the
latter one because I thought it would be newer, without checking
the dates.

The newer draft does indeed answer my two earlier points.
I would request that the following language be deleted:

>                 ......         unless there is an overwhelming
>    reason not to do so.

It doesn't really need to be there, and it doesn't look like
language I have seen in any other specification.  The intent,
as I understand it, is that authors of new specifications would
be expected to follow the suggested format unless other
considerations dictate otherwise.

I suggest also that this draft be considered Informational,
since it does not specify the format of data that will be
transmitted over a network.

Regards,
Charlie P.

> Mohamed Khalil wrote: