- Original Message -
From: Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
To: Bob Hinden bob.hin...@gmail.com
Cc: 6man-cha...@tools.ietf.org;
draft-ietf-6man-uri-zon...@tools.ietf.org; ipv6@ietf.org; Dave
Thaler dtha...@microsoft.com
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: 6MAN WG
Angels on the head of a pin.
I think that almost all the world is unaware of the different
classifications and so the answer for them is moot. Yes, I know, a few
official bodies do care but for Internet at large, it will make no
difference.
That said, I care and think that PS is alway
cc v6ops where there is discussion on draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-experience
2012/7/6, Aleksi Suhonen aleksi.suho...@tut.fi:
Hi,
We've been running a NAT64/DNS64 setup at TREX Tampere Region Exchange
for over a year now and I'd like to submit the following experience for
your draft:
Your inputs
Aleksi == Aleksi Suhonen aleksi.suho...@tut.fi writes:
Aleksi Sorry for late response. It's the summer holiday season
Aleksi here. O:-)
Aleksi On 07/06/2012 05:59 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
Aleksi == Aleksi Suhonenaleksi.suho...@tut.fi writes:
Aleksi Within an hour,
I have read this draft. As previously stated, I like the idea.
comments questions:
Section 2:
/ a client MAY NOT automatically add rows to the policy table/
MAY NOT seems to contradict Section 4
/This option's concept is to serve as a hint for a node about how to
behave in the network./
Folks,
There's one issue that came up during my recent exchange with Suresh on
which I'd like others (including Suresh) to weigh in:
Since first-fragments that fail to include the entire header chain will
be illegal, I think it would be appropriate to include an additional
requirement in
Hi Fernando,
I think this is an essential message that needs to be added as part of the
draft.
Thanks,
Vishwas
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Fernando Gont fg...@si6networks.comwrote:
Folks,
There's one issue that came up during my recent exchange with Suresh on
which I'd like others
On Jul 18, 2012, at 1:36 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
Folks,
There's one issue that came up during my recent exchange with Suresh on
which I'd like others (including Suresh) to weigh in:
Since first-fragments that fail to include the entire header chain will
be illegal, I think it would be
Hi, Fred,
Thanks so much for your prompt response. Please find my comments in-line...
On 07/18/2012 10:03 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
A host that receives a first-fragment that fails to include the
entire IPv6 header chain MUST silently drop the aforementioned
fragment.
Clearly, since
On 16 Jul, 2012, at 20:50, Mark Andrews wrote:
Stuart,
your mail client botched the Content-type line generation.
You may want to report it.
Content-type: image/png; x-unix-mode=0644; name=Whatis#39;
?.png=
Content-transfer-encoding: base64
Content-disposition:
In message d41807cf-b7f5-4770-8fb5-f0630aa4f...@apple.com, Stuart Cheshire wr
ites:
On 16 Jul, 2012, at 20:50, Mark Andrews wrote:
Stuart,
your mail client botched the Content-type line generation.
You may want to report it.
Content-type: image/png; x-unix-mode=0644;
11 matches
Mail list logo