I support nd proxy it should be PS. It should not go to DS without wide
implementation from multiple members I do not believe it is under
specified either. Would I recommend it on a production network, not at
all. What some may be uncomfortable with if they are not implementers
is the
I also do not support the idea or process of an area ad hoc mail list
overruling a working group or chairs support of a document at all. We
already have far to much process and missing time to market from within
the IETF with industry. This is highly questionable behavior as even a
thought.
On Aug 1, 2005, at 2:08, Pekka Savola wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Bob Hinden wrote:
This starts a two week IPv6 working group last call on advancing:
Title : IPv6 Node Information Queries
Author(s) : M. Crawford, B. Haberman
Filename:
Brian,
I agree with the suggestion. My understanding is that this is used for on-link
queries (especially the name lookup) which is a link local multicast.
We also need to get comments on the proposal of limiting the multicast id to
0xFF00 - 0x (overlaying the Solicited Node
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, Brian Haberman wrote:
I would like to solicit opinions from the working group on the suggestions
above. Specifically, the proposal would render existing implementations
non-conformant to the spec. The primary goal of this work has been to
document what the existing code
