>From: Alexandru Petrescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2006/08/24 Thu AM 07:41:21 CDT
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Cc: Tony Hain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 'Ralph Droms' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"'Durand, Alain'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
'IETF IPv6 Mailing List' <ipv6@ietf.org>
>Subject: Re: Prefix Delegation using ICMPv6
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>> In some cases, customers may wish to have an alternative to the
>>>> existing mechanism (WHY they wish to have it is a separate
>>>> question, THAT they do is an issue which helped inform the
>>>> writing of our draft).
>>> I am not opposed to doing something different, but there needs to
>>> be something more than a wish to back it up.
>>
>> Thanks Tony. Please keep in mind the ICMPv6 PD mechanism we propose
>> and the current DHCPv6 PD are not mutually exclusive (I realize
>> you're not saying they are).
>>
>> A real reason why the ICMPv6 PD mechanism is proposed is THAT
>> customers have asked for it.
>
>Customers of what? Customers at home for ISP and DSL? Customers of
>netlmm deployments? Customers of mobile routers?
Hi Alex, please note that we will be including more such details in future
revisions of our draft.
>
>You could mention a little more of the customer landscape you see, in
>current IETF effort terms, and still stay technical.
Absolutely.** Covering both (technical and justification issues) is what we as
a group should do.
>
>Alex
Tim
Rom 8:28
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
