Support! Cheers, Manav
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Abhay Roy <[email protected]> wrote: > We have strong support from all the authors to accept this work ;-) > > Can a few non-authors also chime in with their thoughts/support? > > Speaking as a WG member, I support this work because it also fixes the > Virtual Link limitation we left unsupported in RFC5838 for IPv4 Unicast AF. > > Regards, > -Abhay > > > On 7/22/14, 5:53 PM, Ing-Wher Chen wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I'd like to ask if the working group would adopt and help improve and >> refine >> the following draft: >> >> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chen-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3/> >> >> This document describes a mechanism to transport OSPfv3 over IPv4. >> The mechanism allows devices to migrate to OSPFv3 first, which would help >> with transition to IPv6 later. >> >> The latest -01 version addresses an earlier question by including >> an IPv4-only use case in which deployed devices cannot communicate >> in IPv6 but would benefit from using the mechanism proposed in this draft >> to transition to OSPFv3 for now. Until all devices can communicate using >> IPv6, >> consolidating to OSPFv3 can still reduce operational complexity and cost. >> >> Thanks, >> Helen >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OSPF mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf > > > _______________________________________________ > OSPF mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
