Hi, On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 10:44:32AM -0500, Justin M. Streiner wrote: > My personal opinion is that this feature should have been part of DHCPv6 > from the very beginning - for the sake of feature parity between DHCPv4 > and DHCPv6 - but I was not a part of those discussions.
It would be good for the signal-to-noise ratio to *not* have this
discussion on every single mailing list in the world. Again.
*Please* keep "is DHCPv6 or RA the loonie camp?" *off* cisco-nsp.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected]
pgpKqf1VZPazZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
