Re: [Int-area] Apps Directorate Review of draft-ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-upd

On Sun, 3 Jun 2012, Glen Zorn wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-02 at 21:21 -0700, C. M. Heard wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > > In Section 6.1:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >    Datagram de-duplication can be accomplished using hash-based
> > > > >    duplicate detection for cases where the ID field is absent.
> > > > Under what circumstances would the ID field be absent?
> > > Replace "absent" with "known not unique".
> > Better, I think, would be "not known to be unique".
> Except that the two are not semantically equivalent.
Indeed.  That was why I suggested the change.

//cmh