>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:06:53 +0900, >>>>> JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> As far as I know there has been no response at the list on this subject: > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg04465.html > so I'm going to give it a second try, based on the relevant discussion > at the Minneapolis meeting. Hmm...I still keep failing to get any feedback on this issue, and I don't know how to move on. Assuming we've reached a consensus about the "config consistency vs secure ND/DHCPv6" issue (see the separate thread), all the IESG comments except this one are now resolved. And, since this issue may not require a change of the document per se (i.e., it may be a procedural comment, not one on the documentation itself), my next step would be just to submit a new version of the document with the proposed (and agreed) changes for the reset of the comments and see what will happen. If I miss something fundamental, please point it out ASAP. Thanks, JINMEI, Tatuya Communication Platform Lab. Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
