[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dhcwg] max-unacked-bndupd



On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 01:53:34AM -0700, Damien Neil wrote:
> Since max-unacked-bndupd is defined in section 12.14, which does not  
> include the caveat from sections 7.1 and 7.2, I think that a literal  
> reading of the draft will conclude that this option applies to  
> messages and not transactions.  On the other hand, I think that this  

There's a simpler solution:  Section 6.3 should be removed.

It's a rediculous idea; the benefits are negligable, and certainly
don't outweigh the complexity imposed.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.	-- Jack T. Hankins

Attachment: pgpuAVfKqTYBO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg