jordi, i have experienced the same problem, it doesn't seem to work, i had
to call to book a room -
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19/04/2006 21:22
Please respond to jordi.palet
To: "ietf@ietf.org"
cc:
Subject:Re: 66th IETF - Registration and
I ended up calling and booking via human (which does work), but I had the
same web-based experience as Jordi.
Hi,
The on-line hotel booking form seems to be out of order. Anyone had a
different experience ?
Regards,
Jordi
Interestingly, the website says +CN$20 for an additional person, but
Hi,
The on-line hotel booking form seems to be out of order. Anyone had a
different experience ?
Regards,
Jordi
> De: IETF Secretariat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Responder a: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Fecha: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:09:13 -0400
> Para: IETF Announcement list
> Asunto: 66th IETF - Registra
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 03:45:17PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
>
> not in my recollection. It's been awhile, but I recall pathalias being
> used to do source routing - given a hostname, to specify a complete
> path to that host. (I also recall it sometimes being used to do
> rerouting - discarding
I agree with Jari, having subsets doesn't seem like a good idea. Most use cases
for specific deployments seem to be very limited, and arguments can be made as
to why a more general purpose IPv6 would be a better choice.
John
- original message -
Subject:Re: IPv6 Subsets?
From: Jari Ark
You might also want to look at RFC 4294
(IPv6 Node Requirements).
Brian
Juha Wiljakka wrote:
Hi,
My apologies, the previous message was sent all too early by mistake...
What I ment to say, you might want to have a look at RFC3316. 3GPP is
using it as a reference for Release 5 (and onwards)
RFC 4294 contains the most recent summary information
on what nodes should support from IPv6. The detailed
MUST/SHOULD/MAY requirements are in the IPv6
specifications themselves.
(RFC 3316 that Juha pointed to is a discussion of issues
related to running IPv6 over cellular interfaces. The
type of
Hi,
My apologies, the previous message was sent all too early by mistake...
What I ment to say, you might want to have a look at RFC3316. 3GPP is
using it as a reference for Release 5 (and onwards) cellular hosts. My
personal view is that mobile devices which have IPv6 stack (well, that
is typica
Timothy,
You might want to have a look at RFC3315.
My personal view is that mobile devices implemented according to
Best Regards,
On 4/19/06, Timothy J. Salo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, Ok, I probably haven't been paying attention, but...
>
> If a device implements a subset of IPv6, (e.g.
