Daniel, > (slightly changing the subject of this thread to follow up > what we saying easily) > > As I indicated previous mail, original intent of M/O flags document > is same as what Christian said. This intensity of this document was > originally from the 2462-bis (IMO) and even Node Requirement as well. > > But, as authors of this document, I am open this issue for moving > it forward. > > > p.s., I'd close the previous issue of whether M=1/O=0 is not > valid in full 3315 or not. IMO, the consensus is, > > M=1, O=0 is valid combination as described in this document. > > Let me know your view on this if I am missing anything.
Following the discussions, it isn't entirely clear to me why we could need to open this issue. I think that there is concensus for keeping it as is (as described in Christian's mail). Am I missing something? John -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
