All,
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 12:20 -0400, James Carlson wrote: > > The part I support is clarifying the document. I don't think I > support changing the functionality described in the document. > I agree with this sentiment. It is reasonable for an implementation of IPv6 over PPP to restrict what it sends based on the desire to avoid initiating address resolution, NUD or DAD exchanges. It isn't reasonable, and as far I as I can see out of spec, for implementations to not respond to attempts by their peer to do address resolution, NUD or DAD exchanges. tim -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
