On 22 Oct 2014, at 02:02, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
Up one more level: the charter looks pretty out of date in general.
Hi Brian,
The charter itself still reflects our primary focus. I believe it still
accurately reflects the constraints on our scope.
The
Hello Xueli,
Several people look at this problem as an IP problem. Instead of
considering a cellular+dsl combination in a homebox, they considered
cellular+wifi on a smartphone. But the goal was the same: augment the
bandwidth perceived by the end user.
In implementation it is however
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:19 AM, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi
wrote:
My assertion:
Given HNCP generated one spans whole administrative domain, _and_ should
not have routing anywhere outside it, it’s uniqueness does not _matter_.
Wait. Where did this and should not be routable
On Oct 22, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca wrote:
Sure, people might not do that; sure there might be
some people confusion when 5 friends get together for a LAN party (hey,
why are there three servers called 'quake'? Which one is quake-1?), but I
don't think that
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Michael Richardson mcr+i...@sandelman.ca
wrote:
James Woodyatt j...@nestlabs.com wrote:
My assertion:
Given HNCP generated one spans whole administrative domain, _and_
should not have routing anywhere outside it, it’s uniqueness does
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:40:33PM +0200, David Lamparter wrote:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lamparter-rtgwg-routing-extra-qualifiers/?include_text=1
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lamparter-rtgwg-dst-src-routing/?include_text=1
rtgwg homenet:
So, these drafts describe the
On 22.10.2014, at 20.51, James Woodyatt j...@nestlabs.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:19 AM, Markus Stenberg markus.stenb...@iki.fi
wrote:
Wait. Where did this and should not be routable anywhere outside
recommendation come from? And if it's only a recommendation and not a
On 22/10/2014 23:54, Ray Bellis wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, at 02:02, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
Up one more level: the charter looks pretty out of date in general.
Hi Brian,
The charter itself still reflects our primary focus. I believe it still
accurately
On Oct 22, 2014, at 2:46 PM, James Woodyatt j...@nestlabs.com wrote:
They may often be the only *default* routers, but there can be— and
absolutely definitely will be in the vast majority of cases— overlay networks
that route ULA prefixes to, from and most likely *between* home networks over
On Oct 22, 2014, at 12:06 PM, David Lamparter equi...@diac24.net wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:40:33PM +0200, David Lamparter wrote:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-lamparter-rtgwg-routing-extra-qualifiers/?include_text=1
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote:
On Oct 22, 2014, at 2:46 PM, James Woodyatt j...@nestlabs.com wrote:
They may often be the only *default* routers, but there can be— and
absolutely definitely will be in the vast majority of cases— overlay
networks that
Michael,
On 23/10/2014 07:04, Michael Richardson wrote:
James Woodyatt j...@nestlabs.com wrote:
My assertion:
Given HNCP generated one spans whole administrative domain, _and_
should not have routing anywhere outside it, it’s uniqueness does not
_matter_.
On 10/22/14, 12:46 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 22/10/2014 23:54, Ray Bellis wrote:
On 22 Oct 2014, at 02:02, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
Up one more level: the charter looks pretty out of date in general.
Hi Brian,
The charter itself still reflects our primary
13 matches
Mail list logo
