On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
There are many networks that devices do not through routers. So
asking the router for their addresses is not sufficient.
So, in these cases using the link-local all-hosts multicast address
should be fine?
--
Pekka Savola
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, John Spence wrote:
So, in 99% of cases, I suppose, the multiple /48s would work. It
just might not be quite as clean. If you said to a site "you can
either generate yourself FD85:19EA:73C8::/47, or you can generate
and use FD85:19EA:73C8::/48 and FD1B:9567:CD12::/48", enter
On Sun, Sep 25, 2005 at 06:48:25PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 23-sep-2005, at 17:06, David Meyer wrote:
>
> >The IAB has proposed the below BOF for the upcoming NANOG
>
> That's nice, but...
>
> >The purpose of this BOF for the IAB is to solicit operator
> >feedback on the progr
On 23-sep-2005, at 17:06, David Meyer wrote:
The IAB has proposed the below BOF for the upcoming NANOG
That's nice, but...
The purpose of this BOF for the IAB is to solicit operator
feedback on the progress and direction of IPv6 multi-homing work,
particularly as discussed in the IETF, a
