RE: comments on node requirements revision

Hi Ed, Thanks for these comments - I will add them to the issue tracker. John >-Original Message- >From: ext Ed Jankiewicz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 07 November, 2008 22:57 >To: Loughney John (Nokia-D/MtView) >Cc: ipv6@ietf.org >Subject: comments on node requirements revision >

Re: [dhcwg] DHCPv6 Proxy Agent

On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 21:24:00 -0700 Ted Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Ted, > On Nov 3, 2008, at 6:40 PM, Joseph Hyunwook Cha wrote: > > However, if the service provider provides DHCPv6 service for the > > internet connectivity of customer's hosts and is willing to give > > only /128 add

Re: seeking advice on "Arrangement for reaching IPv4 public network nodes by a node in a IPv4 private network via an IPv6 access network"

Are the terms sufficiently broad that you might consider that it (somehow) covers, say, dual-stack lite? If so, I'd think at least an IPR is in order. (note: I've only taken a cursory glance at a USPTO diagram while very sleepy so perhaps the comment is irrelevant) On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:34 AM