On 27-jul-2005, at 4:01, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
Are 1) and 3) mutually exclusive, or is the requirement to have some
M/O combination that says There is no DHCP, do not try to find it
and another combination that says I make so representation about the
DHCP status so you're free to have a
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:21:55 +0200,
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Are 1) and 3) mutually exclusive, or is the requirement to have some
M/O combination that says There is no DHCP, do not try to find it
and another combination that says I make so representation about the
DHCP
On 27-jul-2005, at 9:44, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
Requirement 1 simply says DHCP is not available; it doesn't say
do
not try to find it.
I disagree. On some networks it's inappropriate to try to use DHCPv6.
You can disagree about anything, but please remember that we are (or
at least
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:56:29 +0200,
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Requirement 1 simply says DHCP is not available; it doesn't say
do
not try to find it.
I disagree. On some networks it's inappropriate to try to use DHCPv6.
You can disagree about anything, but please
[Bugger! Lost the reply I was writing for this! ]
Packet rate however starts becoming a problem at faster speeds, at gige
it starts becoming a problem for hosts to deal with unless they are
careful. And not all networks are fast, 3G networks are becoming more
prevalent. We should not waste
The flags are just hints, the host can always ignore
them. If it is inappropriate to try to use DHCP when flags
are zero, let it be so. Similarly if the flag(s) is (are) set,
the host can always ignore.
Otherwise we need to say that the M/O flags are triggers
of DHCP. So we need to agree if the
On 27 Jul 2005, at 11:58, Syam Madanapalli wrote:
Otherwise we need to say that the M/O flags are triggers
of DHCP. So we need to agree if the flags are hints or triggers.
I would add that if they are hints, then we are not mandating any
signalling between DHCPv6 relays or servers and
Hi,
I plan to use p2p protocol(VIRGO) I proposed to build distributes DNS.
VIRGO contains an
n-tuple replicated virtual tree structured network that differs from
DHT-based P2P networks and random unstructured networks cached by
least-recently used (LRU) and minimum difference (MinD)
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 14:01:10 +0900 (JST),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
| Here is the first cut at an agenda for the IPv6 working group session at
| the Paris IETF. Please review and send us comments, deletions, and
additions.
Could you please give me a few minutes for following draft?
On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 09:00:00PM +0900, JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL
PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 14:01:10 +0900 (JST),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
| Here is the first cut at an agenda for the IPv6 working group session at
| the Paris IETF. Please review and send us comments,
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005, JINMEI Tatuya / [ISO-2022-JP] ¿ÀÌÀãºÈ wrote:
Case2: ULA or Global Prioritization
Case3: Multicast Source Address Selection
For these cases, using a non default policy table could resolve the
issue (and automatic policy distribution would help), but I personally
think this
Brian, if I have this right, you're talking about two possibilities
here:
1. Release the NSAPA destination option code, and have IANA mark it as
reserved, or
2. Do nothing, which retains the NSAPA designation for that option code
0xC3.
Is there any practical value to changing the designation
On 27-jul-2005, at 16:27, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
The flags are just hints, the host can always ignore
them. If it is inappropriate to try to use DHCP when flags
are zero, let it be so. Similarly if the flag(s) is (are) set,
the host can always ignore.
Yes, this is my understanding, too,
And why not NS?
Because when A talks to B, you want A to do the MTU discovery
and for B
to learn the MTU too, but you don't want both sending MTU
probes, only
one of them needs to do so.
Disagree - PMTU probing is a unidirectional endeavor since the path
from A-B may have completely
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:39:37 +0200,
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The flags are just hints, the host can always ignore
them. If it is inappropriate to try to use DHCP when flags
are zero, let it be so. Similarly if the flag(s) is (are) set,
the host can always ignore.
Yes,
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:22:49 +0900,
JINMEI Tatuya [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
While opinions on the details so varied, we seem to have agreed that
we need to fix the requirements for those flags (or something
similar/replacement in RA) first.
With some minor updates after clarification
On Jul 27, 2005, at 12:21 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Requirement 1 simply says DHCP is not available; it doesn't say do
not try to find it.
I disagree. On some networks it's inappropriate to try to use DHCPv6.
And if hosts are going to look for DHCPv6 servers regardless of the
value
Templin, Fred L wrote:
And why not NS?
Because when A talks to B, you want A to do the MTU discovery
and for B
to learn the MTU too, but you don't want both sending MTU
probes, only
one of them needs to do so.
Disagree - PMTU probing is a unidirectional endeavor since the path
from A-B
Disagree - PMTU probing is a unidirectional endeavor since the path
from A-B may have completely different characteristics than B-A.
But this isn't on a path, it's on the same L2. L2 traditionally is a
spanning tree, or broadcast media so the assumption seems to hold.
When a tunnel is
Thus spake Perry Lorier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Templin, Fred L wrote:
Disagree - PMTU probing is a unidirectional endeavor since the path
from A-B may have completely different characteristics than B-A.
But this isn't on a path, it's on the same L2. L2 traditionally is a
spanning tree, or
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, JINMEI Tatuya / [ISO-2022-JP] ¿ÀÌÀãºÈ wrote:
1') Some people also wanted to indicate a stronger message of do
not try to find it for some networks in requirement 1.
Possible scenarios include bandwidth-sensitive networks (such
as 3G?) and the case where
Hi Iljitsch, Perry,
I'll admit I haven't been fully following your thread of discussion,
I've been a bit busy on some other things (another reason why I like the
simple solution - less thinking :-) )
Something to keep in mind for your solution. TCP announces the maximum
segment size it can
22 matches
Mail list logo
