Hi, Just hoping to avoid the similar mess as we're having with MIPv6 and MLDv2, would it be possible to pre-assign a Neighbor Discovery Option code for more specific routes extension in: http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters
.. this shouldn't cause a problem, as there are no IANA considerations for applying these in RFC2461, and I guess they're allocated in a basically FCFS basis. Various ímplementations are using various values, at least some of them "9" -- which is already being used for something else. Would it make thse to try to pre-assign a value at this point so folks could start building interoperable implementations already? :-) (Assuming that the spec is going to be finished soon.. :-) On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Dave Thaler wrote: > I've gone through the threads that Rich Draves sent me to extract > the issues raised with draft-ietf-ipv6-router-selection-02.txt. > > There were a number of relatively minor editorial suggestions to > which Rich had responded with an okay. These I am already > incorporating into the document. > > Besides those, there were 10 issues raised which are now at > http://www.icir.org/dthaler/RouterSelectionIssues.htm > > I should have a proposed update available prior to IETF. > > -Dave > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
