presume the absense of a router.
--bill
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 01:28:24AM -0400, John Jason Brzozowski wrote:
> Anjali,
>
> Assuming you have a router in your test bed you should configure the same to
> transmit router advertisements.
>
> HTH,
>
> John
>
>
> On 9/18/07 1:08 AM, "An
Anjali,
Assuming you have a router in your test bed you should configure the same to
transmit router advertisements.
HTH,
John
On 9/18/07 1:08 AM, "Anjali Gajendragadkar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have installed IPv6 teste bed and configured DHCPv6 server. Can you please
> tell me how to
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
I have installed IPv6 teste bed and configured DHCPv6 server. Can you please
tell me how to configure IPv6 gateway address in DHCPv6
- Anjali
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www
> Somewhere along the way, it was decided that a 128 bit address was
> more appropriate - if 32 bits isn't enough for all uses for all time,
> who says 64 is? Long story there that I wasn't a party to.
That was actually decided during the review of the SIPP proposal, and was
pretty much a conditi
I'm not quite sure what point you're making.
If it's the size of the network part or the host part of an IPv6
address, as I recall the logic, the original stated requirement was
that an ipng address should be able to represent 10^12 networks (42
bits) and 10^15 hosts (52 bits). Considering
> The following is meant to be used for demonstration purposes.
> It is meant for any and all to make reference to in discussions where
> "16 bits" may come into play.
ip address allocation has nothing to with the physical object sizes.
for instance, you can have 2 separate ip add
The following is meant to be used for demonstration purposes.
It is meant for any and all to make reference to in discussions where
"16 bits" may come into play.
(I anticipate sending out something soon which does just that. ;-))
What's 16 Bits Between Friends?
In any discussion about protoco
I did not see any complaints, so given that Brian's new
version is in the directories I will proceed with the
approval.
Thanks,
Jari
Brian Haberman kirjoitti:
> All,
> The IESG reviewed the RA flags option draft and provided several
> comments. In order to address those comments, I propose
