Subject: (ngtrans) diff-serv comment 4 on transition mechanisms

From: Erik Nordmark <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1999 13:39:56 -0700 (PDT)

>----------------Begin Forwarded Message----------------<

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 23:27:25 +0900
From: "Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: (v6 5492) RE: ECN: Tunnel/SA relationship 
To: [email-masked]
Cc: "'Brian E Carpenter'" <[email-masked]>, "Erik Nordmark"
<[email-masked]>, "Black,    David" <[email-masked]>,
[email-masked], "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>

>Not sure what to do about the other two bits - I'm
>inclined to say nothing to avoid the dependency problem
>you pointed out, BUT can we point to the ECN RFC
>as something the implementer might want to be cognizant
>of without making a normative reference to it (i.e., as
>a hint)?

	I think we need a more generalized version of draft-ipsec-ecn-00.
	The draft speaks mainly about IPsec tunnel but it actually applies
	to most of the tunnelling technologies available.

itojun
>----------------End Forwarded Message----------------<