Patrik Fältström wrote:
--On 2000-01-05 02.37 -0800, Ed Gerck <egerck(_at_)nma(_dot_)com> wrote:
What we have in the
proposed RFC is thus an outdated spec -- problems that were actually
reported *solved* in the March-October 1999 timeframe appear again
*unsolved* in the December 1999 timeframe.
In real life, I have not checked whether NSI really _uses_ what we talked
about in the timeframe March-October, and in some cases (timestamps for
example) it is already clear that they use what is specified in the I-D and
NOT what the RAB proposed, i.e. what is in the email archives of RAB.
How can you say " in some cases (timestamps for example) it is already
clear that they use what is specified in the I-D"? Did you test it? Have you
been using the protocol that is in use today?
If not, I ask myself how you can state that the protocol is what is specified
in the I-D.
Cheers,
Ed Gerck