I noticed in Section 5.4.2 "Sending Neighbor Solicitation Messages" that MLD (RFC 2710) is referenced (and correctly so). Subsequently, MLD-snooping switches are briefly mentioned. It might be beneficial to also reference RFC 3590 here (which updates RFC 2710). Thnx.
- Pete -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 9:38 PM To: Suresh Krishnan Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2462bis-03.txt >>>>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 22:21:13 -0400 (EDT), >>>>> Suresh Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > The draft seems to be truncated from section 5.6 until the end of the > document. So the change history, appendices and references are not > present. Yes, I've noticed that, too. I don't know why this happened...I submitted the draft as a pointer to: http://www.jinmei.org/draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2462bis-03.txt which does not seem to be truncated. I asked the I-D secretariat if we can fix the problem, but I'm afraid we can't do that until new I-Ds will be accepted again on August 9th. In any event, please refer to the version available at the above URL, which is identical to the one I intended (and will intend) to submit. JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
