> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 12:44:21 +0900,
> JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> In Section 5.5.3 (d) [not (e) as the previous message said], last para:
>> If an address is formed successfully, the host adds it to the list
>> of addresses assigned to the interface, initializing its pre
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 12:44:21 +0900,
> JINMEI Tatuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> In Section 5.3:
>> A link-local address is formed by prepending the well-known
>> link-local prefix [RFC3513] (of appropriate length) to the interface
>> identifier. If the interface identifier has a leng
> On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 23:29:09 +0200 ,
> "Elwyn Davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> In Section 5.3:
>A link-local address is formed by prepending the well-known
>link-local prefix [RFC3513] (of appropriate length) to the interface
>identifier. If the interface identifier has
Title: RE: new rev. of rfc2462bis will be coming
Sorry - I spotted a couple of other points (updated):
In Section 5.3:
A link-local address is formed by prepending the well-known
link-local prefix [RFC3513] (of appropriate length) to the interface
identifier. If the interface ide
Title: RE: new rev. of rfc2462bis will be coming
Sorry - I spotted a couple of other points:
In Section 5.3:
A link-local address is formed by prepending the well-known
link-local prefix [RFC3513] (of appropriate length) to the interface
identifier. If the interface identifier ha
I believe we are almost done about the post-WGLC comments on
rfc2462bis, and I'm going to submit a new revision, addressing the
comments.
The release candidate of the new revision is temporarily available at
http://www.jinmei.org/draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2462bis-06.txt .
If anyone of you finds someth
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Fri Aug 20 15:11:28 2004]:
>
> Proposed resolution:
>
> - replace "multicast interface" with "multicast-capable interface" in
> Section 5.1
> - modify the definition of "link" in Section 2 a little bit like:
>
>link - a communication facility or medium over which node
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Fri Aug 20 15:11:28 2004]:
>
> Proposed resolution:
>
> - replace "multicast interface" with "multicast-capable interface" in
> Section 5.1
> - modify the definition of "link" in Section 2 a little bit like:
>
>link - a communication facility or medium over which node
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Fri Aug 20 15:21:14 2004]:
>
> Proposed Resolution:
>
> - add a reference to RFC3810 as well as to RFC2710
>
> - make a small modification to the 5th paragraph of section 5.4.2 to:
(snip)
> See the following link and its follow-ups for more details:
> http://www1.ietf.org
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Fri Aug 20 15:21:14 2004]:
>
> Proposed Resolution:
>
> - add a reference to RFC3810 as well as to RFC2710
>
> - make a small modification to the 5th paragraph of section 5.4.2 to:
(snip)
> See the following link and its follow-ups for more details:
> http://www1.ietf.org
(sorry for the delayed response)
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:29:10 +0100,
> "Elwyn Davies" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Unfortunately the links are not specified - 2461 says ND applies to all
> links unless the link specific doc says otherwise (see the Intro to
> 2461/2461bis).
> So I sugge
> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 10:11:59 +0200,
> Brian E Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Your suggested changes seem fine to me. I certainly don't
> think we should recall the draft from the RFC Editor. If the
> changes can be made as editorial updates, that's fine. If not,
> they can simply
12 matches
Mail list logo
