On 2011-04-20 13:05, Dan Wing wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hin...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:20 PM
>> To: Dan Wing
>> Cc: Bob Hinden; 'Philip Homburg'; 'David Woodhouse'; ipv6@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: PMTU blackhole detection
>>
>> Dan,
>>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hin...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:20 PM
> To: Dan Wing
> Cc: Bob Hinden; 'Philip Homburg'; 'David Woodhouse'; ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: PMTU blackhole detection
>
> Dan,
>
>
> >> On the other hand, the difference be
Dan,
>> On the other hand, the difference between 1500 and 1280 is so small, I
>> wonder if breaking things just because you want to send packets
>> at 1500 bytes makes a lot of sense.
>>
>> One other thing, if this makes the IPv6 experience worse than industry
>> standard for IPv4, then maybe
Hitoshi Asaeda writes:
> >> "Nodes that need to join multicast groups SHOULD also implement either
> >> MLDv2 [RFC3810] or Lightweight MLDv2 [RFC5790]."
> >
> > Is there a short (less than one page) description of the difference
> > between RFCs 3810 and 5790? One that actually explains what th
Hi Ran,
On 11-04-17 04:54 PM, RJ Atkinson wrote:
Earlier, Hing-Kam Lam wrote:
I thought we were very close to the WG LC last time and
the new version is addressing all the points raised.
Unfortunately, the new version unfortunately does not address
my comments, or those of others with simil
> -Original Message-
> From: pch-b6b534...@u-1.phicoh.com [mailto:pch-b6B5344D9@u-
> 1.phicoh.com] On Behalf Of Philip Homburg
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 1:29 AM
> To: Dan Wing
> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: PMTU blackhole detection
>
> In your letter dated Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:45:
In your letter dated Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:45:45 -0700 you wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Philip Homburg
>> On the other hand, the difference between 1500 and 1280 is so small, I
>> wonder if breaking things just beca
