I've been editing a new version of rfc2462bis, mainly addressing AD
comments, and I found one minor issue in Section 5.5.3 (creation of
global addresses using RA):
According to rfc2462bis-06, step (d) of the procedure can be
represented as follows:
d-1 check whether the prefix in RA is equal to
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 09:41:57PM -0800, Alain Durand wrote:
I'd suggest to not publish any rationale and simply say something like:
4.4 DNS Issues
At the present time and PTR records for locally assigned local
IPv6 addresses are not recommended to be installed in the
Bill, this is my last go on this. Not that I specially want
to leave you the last word, but if you don't get what I'm
saying after all this, it's pointless to continue. Below...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 11:33:28AM +0100, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 9, 2004, at 5:52, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Bill, this is my last go on this. Not that I specially want
to leave you the last word, but if you don't get what I'm
saying after all this, it's pointless to continue. Below...
we agree to disagree. only history will tell if the IESG is making
On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 09:27:50AM -0500, Brian Haberman wrote:
I agree that it is a problem, but not one specific to ULAs.
Indeed, it's the dont-publish-unreachables's draft space... but that one
never reached consensus or thus publication.
Right. And, while I personally agree with the
I couldn't find any mention of RFC2526 Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast
Addresses
in the node requirement document.
Is it OK for an IPv6 node to ignore it? in practice, should/must an
implementation
have some code to:
1- prohibit such addresses to be configured on an interface
2-
WG chair hat on
Please note that I am the shepherding chair for this document.
I have gone through the mailing list discussions on this document
several times. Everyone should note that this document has been
through WG Last Call, IESG Review, and IETF Last Call. Given the
level of reviews and
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 18:40:33 +0900,
JINMEI Tatuya [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I've been editing a new version of rfc2462bis, mainly addressing AD
comments, and I found one minor issue in Section 5.5.3 (creation of
global addresses using RA):
(snip)
So, I'd like to propose to revise the last
