Re: Flow Label support in the Node Requirements bis document

2011-11-03 Thread Shane Amante
On Nov 3, 2011, at 12:00 PM, Thomas Narten wrote: > John, > > This should not be a surprising or controversial change to the > node-requirements document. The WG made the decision earlier that we'd > leave out a reference to the Flow Label work because we didn't want to > have node-requirements b

Re: Flow Label support in the Node Requirements bis document

2011-11-03 Thread John Leslie
Thomas Narten wrote: > > This should not be a surprising or controversial change to the > node-requirements document. The WG made the decision earlier that we'd > leave out a reference to the Flow Label work because we didn't want to > have node-requirements block waiting for it, but we would rev

Re: 6MAN WG Last Call:

2011-11-03 Thread Glen Turner
The contents of the Line Identification Destination Option are essentially opaque. Although this may allow a wide range of router implementations, in practice it leads to a situation where new implementers must reverse-engineer the dominant implementation in order to be assured of compatibility.

Re: Flow Label support in the Node Requirements bis document

2011-11-03 Thread Thomas Narten
John, This should not be a surprising or controversial change to the node-requirements document. The WG made the decision earlier that we'd leave out a reference to the Flow Label work because we didn't want to have node-requirements block waiting for it, but we would revisit if that work finished

Re: Flow Label support in the Node Requirements bis document

2011-11-03 Thread John Leslie
Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 2011-11-03 15:50, john.lough...@nokia.com wrote: >> >> ... I would suggest the following text: >> >> All nodes SHOULD support RFC 6437, IPv6 Flow Label Specification, >> defines the IPv6 Flow Label. Specifically: >> >> "Forwarding nodes such as routers and load

RE: 6MAN WG Last Call:

2011-11-03 Thread David Allan I
Support! This document addresses an important issue in introducing IPv6 dual stack into broadband access networks. N:1 VLAN as per TR-101 is a common deployment model... Dave On 11/3/2011 11:32 AM, Bob Hinden wrote: > All, > > This message starts a two week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on adv

Re: 6MAN WG Last Call:

2011-11-03 Thread Joel M. Halpern
Support. I have read this document. It provides a useful function in practical fashion. It is ready for publication. Yours, Joel M. Halpern On 11/3/2011 11:32 AM, Bob Hinden wrote: All, This message starts a two week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on advancing: Title : Th

6MAN WG Last Call:

2011-11-03 Thread Bob Hinden
All, This message starts a two week 6MAN Working Group Last Call on advancing: Title : The Line Identification Destination Option Author(s) : Suresh Krishnan Alan Kavanagh Balazs Varga Sv

IETF82 6man Agenda

2011-11-03 Thread Bob Hinden
The current agenda for the 6man session can be found at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/agenda/6man.html The session is on Monday, 09:00-11:30, November 14, 2011, in 3F Banquet. Speakers need to get their slides (pdf preferred) to us by Sunday 5pm. We also need a jabber scribe and minute