On Jan 15, 2010, at 8:07 AM, Dan Wing wrote:
Missing a Pro that I consider significant:
- Users will no longer experience multi-second connection delays due
to IPv6's address selection. This means more users will
leave IPv6 enabled.
To me, that's the big issue. The point is to find
It appears from the discussion that the "network administrator" is
trying to get *multiple* Linksys/equivalent systems to work together
with no intervention (and potentially with multiple, independent ISPs).
None of the people who I know who have such a setup with IPv4 expect
this to work "out
well, of course. The question isn't what the RFC was written for, it's
what it might be used for. In this case, the "network administrator"
is the person who in today's internet installs a Linksys/equivalent
system in the residence/SOHO and expects to to work before they have
attached to th
> -Original Message-
> From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Suresh Krishnan
> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 3:12 PM
> To: Ole Troan
> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Question: Detecting routers on a link
>
> Hi Ole,
>
> On 10-01-12 12:50 PM, Ol
Wojciech Dec (wdec) wrote:
In general, reading through the ULA rfc, while there is a fair bot of
talk regarding pseudo-random ULA global-id's and use along with SLAAC,
there hardly is any reference to the scenario where there can be
multiple global-id's per site sourced by multiple routers. Howe
> -Original Message-
> From: Arifumi Matsumoto [mailto:arif...@nttv6.net]
> Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 3:13 AM
> To: IETF IPv6 Mailing List
> Cc: Rémi Denis-Courmont; Dan Wing;
> draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-...@tools.ietf.org;
> draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-considerati...@tools.iet
The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Maintenance WG (6man) to
consider the following document:
- 'A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation '
as a Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Plea
松本の隔週報です。
* IETF/BBF方面
- Ciscoさん,沖本さんと進め方打合せ
- アドレス選択議論 6man MLで継続中。
- アドレス選択実装者に対してコンタクト。
競合回避方式について意見照会中。
- huaweiと情報交換テレカンの調整。
* NOC方面
- GoogleとJPNAPでピアリングセットアップ。
について問い合わせ中。
- cherry故障対策。
diamondとrubyのセットアップ。
- 大手町シリアル線収容替え。
- seattle故障対応。
- セキュリティポリシーの確認など。
* 岡田君関係
- 全国大会原稿提出
*
Hi,
let me summarize the discussion we had about address selection,
and move on to the next-step.
The discussion was about a try-and-error based mechanism proposed
by Fred Baker, and the address selection design team's proposal,
which is based on policy distribution.
* Fred's proposal.
- A host
Pekka, Brian, Juergen,
So, I'd actually suggest that we go for 1) or 2) but soften that a bit,
like: "if it is known by some external method that the prefix includes
an IPv4 address, the representation MAY print it in dotted decimal".
With "external method" I'm thinking of either a co
10 matches
Mail list logo
