On 2004-09-24, JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if this version addresses the three points below I made
> in the previous last call (*)
> (*) http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg03082.html
Hi Jinmei,
Well, I'm glad it's managed to address t
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:49:02 -0400,
> Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> All,
> This starts a 1 week IPv6 Working Group Last Call on advancing:
> Title : Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection for
> IPv6
> Author(s) : N. Moore
> F
On 2004-09-23, Soliman, Hesham wrote:
>
> => Actually, just another comment on the same line in the draft,
> what kind of work is needed to allow for SEND and optDAD to coexist?
> SEND should make life easier for this proposal, what needs
> to be done?
On 2004-09-23, Jari Arkko wrote:
>
> I agre
On 2004-09-23, Pekka Savola wrote:
>
> 5. Security Considerations
>
>Further work will be required to integrate Optimistic DAD with Secure
>Neighbor Discovery [SEND].
>
> ==> sorry for not saying this earlier, but this seems unacceptable to
> me. SEND specs are already in the RFC-ed que
Folks,
This is now an old issue and no one objected to
the resolution below. In addition, a few people seem
to be against explicitly restricting the prefix to 64
bits in the specification. So I'm closing this
issue with the resolution shown below.
Hesham
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Tue Jul 20 10:02:
Folks,
This is now an old issue and no one objected to
the resolution below. In addition, a few people seem
to be against explicitly restricting the prefix to 64
bits in the specification. So I'm closing this
issue with the resolution shown below.
Hesham
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Tue Jul 20 10:02:
> One major comment:
>
>
> 5. Security Considerations
>
>Further work will be required to integrate Optimistic DAD
> with Secure
>Neighbor Discovery [SEND].
Margaret & Thomas,
On behalf of the IPv6 WG, the chairs request the advancement of:
Title : IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
Author(s) : S. Thomson, et al.
Filename : draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2462bis-06.txt
Pages: 32
Date
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:00:02 -0400,
> Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> This note starts a one-week IPv6 WG Last Call, to ensure
> resolution of
> all open issues, on advancing:
> Title : IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
> Author(s)
While writing the recent draft on NAT-PT deprecation, I had occasion to
review RFC1838 and RFC3128 which relate to security threats with fragmented
IPv4 packets. One of the problems was that the IPv4 specification allowed
for fragments to overlap. It appears that the general assumption is that
IP
==> sorry for not saying this earlier, but this seems unacceptable to
me. SEND specs are already in the RFC-ed queue, and the WG has been
closed. This IMHO needs to be analyzed here. I.e., analyze and state
how oDAD interacts (or not) with SEND. AFAICS, there shouldn't be any
showstoppers here
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Brian Haberman wrote:
> This starts a 1 week IPv6 Working Group Last Call on advancing:
>
> Title : Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection for IPv6
> Author(s) : N. Moore
> Filename : draft-ietf-ipv6-optimistic-dad-02.txt
>
12 matches
Mail list logo
