Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-00.txt

2008-02-21 Thread Vishwas Manral
Hi Brian, You actually bring a very important issue. As a protocol implementor, I feel we need to keep track of changes for all RFC's and drafts. As we support one version of the RFC or draft the document changes so often these days. It is hard to keep track of all changes done to a document from

Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-00.txt

2008-02-21 Thread Brian E Carpenter
John, Thanks for taking this on. Please can we have a list of changes from RFC 4294, as a permanent Appendix (i.e., not to be removed by the RFC Editor)? At the moment it's very hard to spot the changes, even with a diff, especially since you changed from symbolic to numeric references. Brian

Call for Agenda Items

2008-02-21 Thread Bob Hinden
Hi, The 6man WG has a meeting slot during IETF 71 in Philadelphia. The chairs are beginning to pull together the meeting agenda. If you have a presentation request, please e-mail those to the chairs (6man- [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Regards, Brian & Bob

toward sloving the address selection problems

2008-02-21 Thread Arifumi Matsumoto
Folks, Now that draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-sol was approved as an 6man wg item, I'd like to start discussion about which one we should standardize. The applicability comparison figure in section 4.1 shows that each mechanism has different applicability domain and the conclusion is that a right s