Re: IPv6CP - rfc 2472 --- why only IID, why not prefix too

Hi Rajan, Rajan Srivastava wrote: Hi Bhaskar, Yes, you are right if we talk about a PPPv6 client inside a LAN. But if I have a PPPv6 client running at my home PC, I can't do ND. I will have to resort to a DHCPv6 client [implemented at my PC itself]! Or is there any alternative? ND runs over the PPP

Re: IPv6CP - rfc 2472 --- why only IID, why not prefix too

Hi Rajan, Rajan Srivastava wrote: Hi Greg, Thanks for the kind & prompt response. What you mentioned is correct; but this kind of provision in IPv6 framework has resulted in more complex implementations. Eg., if PPP server would have allocated one prefix to PPP client (in IPv6CP) then the client wo

Re: IPv6CP - rfc 2472 --- why only IID, why not prefix too

> From: "Rajan Srivastava" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But if I have a PPPv6 client running at my home PC, I can't do ND. > I will have to resort to a DHCPv6 client [implemented at my PC itself]! > Or is there any alternative? Uhh? IPv6 stack is perfectly capable of receiving RA with prefix information

Re: IPv6CP - rfc 2472 --- why only IID, why not prefix too

Hi Bhaskar, Yes, you are right if we talk about a PPPv6 client inside a LAN. But if I have a PPPv6 client running at my home PC, I can't do ND. I will have to resort to a DHCPv6 client [implemented at my PC itself]! Or is there any alternative? thanks & regards Rajan From: Bhaskar S <[EMAIL PROTECT

[rfc2462bis] what if A flag changes (Re: AD Review of draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2462bis-06.txt)

> On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:01:35 -0500, > Margaret Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > What happens if the value of the "autonomous address-configuration > flag" changes over time? >> >> My understanding is that the change means nothing; if the "autonomous >> address-configuratio