all emailers beware, kohno san is at cisco not juniper these years.
randy
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
Randy Bush wrote
>> Original Text
>> -
>>(b) Addresses in which the rightmost 64 bits are assigned the
>> highest 128 values (i.e., :::ff7f to :::
>> ) SHOULD NOT be used as unicast addresses, to avoid
>> colliding with reserved
Hi Erik,
On 11/25/2012 11:43 PM, Erik Kline wrote:
> Was there discussion of the status of this document in Atlanta, and I
> just missed it?
You are right. There was no discussion of this at the Atlanta F2F meeting.
>
> One tweak I think the document might need is just a single-sentence
> clari
> Original Text
> -
>(b) Addresses in which the rightmost 64 bits are assigned the
> highest 128 values (i.e., :::ff7f to :::
> ) SHOULD NOT be used as unicast addresses, to avoid
> colliding with reserved subnet anycast addresses
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6164,
"Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on Inter-Router Links".
--
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6164&eid=3422
--
Typ
Hello Michael,
Thank you for the reply. I have some comments, see below.
Le 28/11/2012 15:28, Michael Richardson a écrit :
"Alexandru" == Alexandru Petrescu
writes:
1) what use cases need topologically significant prefixes with
default routes
Alexandru> A vehicle assigned with globally-s
