On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:33:08 -0600
"Stephen Sprunk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Part of the problem is "site" has been overloaded to mean "administrative
> domain", whereas the common meaning is a single physical location. Neither
> makes sense to me in the 09 text, though.
>
Maybe it would
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Haberman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Stephen Sprunk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Bob Hinden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Mark Smith"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 14:49
Subject: Re: Proposed update to ULA Draft (-09)
>
> On Jan 17, 2005, at 1
[Corrected error in subject line]
Margaret & Thomas,
On behalf of the IPv6 WG, the chairs request the advancement of:
Title : Bridge-like Neighbor Discovery Proxies (ND Proxy)
Author(s) : D. Thaler, et al.
Filename: draft-ietf-ipv6-ndproxy-00.txt
On Jan 17, 2005, at 14:57, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Thus spake "Bob Hinden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
At 04:40 AM 01/17/2005, Mark Smith wrote:
(as a side note, this is from Rev 8, the nokia web site resolves to
an
IPv6 address, I don't seem to be able to get to it via my 6to4
connection though)
For l
Thus spake "Bob Hinden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At 04:40 AM 01/17/2005, Mark Smith wrote:
> >(as a side note, this is from Rev 8, the nokia web site resolves to an
> >IPv6 address, I don't seem to be able to get to it via my 6to4
> >connection though)
> >
> >For link-state IGPs, it is suggested t
Margaret & Thomas,
On behalf of the IPv6 WG, the chairs request the advancement of:
Title : Bridge-like Neighbor Discovery Proxies (ND Proxy)
Author(s) : D. Thaler, et al.
Filename: draft-ietf-ipv6-ndproxy-00.txt
Pages : 17
D
Mark,
Combining your two emails.
At 04:40 AM 01/17/2005, Mark Smith wrote:
(as a side note, this is from Rev 8, the nokia web site resolves to an
IPv6 address, I don't seem to be able to get to it via my 6to4
connection though)
For link-state IGPs, it is suggested that a site utilizing ULA
pr
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:10:34 +1030
Mark Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what my opinion is regarding which addressing model would
> be best, and maybe there isn't one "best" one. I suppose both of them
> could be suggested, with the caveats of each of them described.
> Possibly,
Hi Bob, Brian,
I'm a bit concerned about this suggestion, in section 4.1, Routing :
(as a side note, this is from Rev 8, the nokia web site resolves to an
IPv6 address, I don't seem to be able to get to it via my 6to4
connection though)
For link-state IGPs, it is suggested that a site utilizi
I support this version. Although I don't fully agree with
the concerns expressed by some IESG members, I think this
new version is quite OK, and the quickest way make ULAs
available to networks that need them.
Brian
Brian Haberman wrote:
IPv6 WG,
In order to resolve the last IESG discuss comment
10 matches
Mail list logo
