Alain,
Any legacy host that didn't support the new option also
wouldn't know how to support anything defined in the
extension space. So I don't think there is a problem with
legacy hosts.
One thing I found unclear from the draft was if the 'legacy' bits
will be 'ported' or not to the new spac
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> RFC2461, Section 4.2 says the following about new options:
>
>Future versions of this protocol may define new option types.
>Receivers MUST silently ignore any options they do not
> recognize
>
Hi,
On Feb 5, 2007, at 9:14 AM, Durand, Alain wrote:
I would like to ask what is the transition plan for "legacy" IPv6
hosts
that do not implement this extension before I could consider this
draft
a viable approach.
RFC2461, Section 4.2 says the following about new options:
Future
Good afternoon all,
>From: "Durand, Alain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/02/05 Mon AM 11:14:10 CST
>To: Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ipv6@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: WG Request: Adopt draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
>I would like to ask what is the transition plan for "legacy" IPv6
Good afternoon all,
>From: "Durand, Alain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/02/05 Mon AM 11:14:10 CST
>To: Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ipv6@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: WG Request: Adopt draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
>I would like to ask what is the transition plan for "legacy" IPv6
I would like to ask what is the transition plan for "legacy" IPv6 hosts
that do not implement this extension before I could consider this draft
a viable approach.
We have a number of bits that are currently defined that may be
questionable,
(the best example: O & M), so I would like to see some mo
Hi Brian,
I fully support this draft becoming a WG document.
Cheers
Suresh
Brian Haberman wrote:
All,
This is a formal call to request IPv6 WG feedback on adopting the
below draft. The premise of the draft is to expand the flags field that
is quickly running out of bits.
Please pr
Brian Haberman wrote:
All, This is a formal call to request IPv6 WG feedback on adopting
the below draft. The premise of the draft is to expand the flags
field that is quickly running out of bits.
Please provide your preference (positive or negative) on having this
document become an IPv6 WG do
