On 29 Apr 2013, at 20:39, Ray Hunter v6...@globis.net wrote:
Christian Huitema wrote:
The problem here is that don't have all the names/IDs we'd like. For
example, using the MAC address as the Interface_ID would do for this
purpose... but the the IPv6 address is tied to the MAC address, and
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.
Title : Distributing Address Selection Policy using DHCPv6
Author(s) : Arifumi Matsumoto
Brian,
thank you for your review.
I posted a revision to reflect your suggestions.
Regarding the section 3, I changed several sentences, to reduce
implementors' confusion, and to serve better for uniform implementation
behavior.
Best regards,
A new version of I-D,
#1: Proper source for an Interface Identifier
Version -06 of the document includes the interface index in the
expression F() that generate the stable privacy IIDs. It has been noted
that interface indexes might not be stable, and that, in any case,
mandating a specific source for tan
Tim Chown wrote:
On 29 Apr 2013, at 20:39, Ray Hunter v6...@globis.net
mailto:v6...@globis.net wrote:
Christian Huitema wrote:
The problem here is that don't have all the names/IDs we'd like.
For example, using the MAC address as the Interface_ID would do for
this
purpose... but the the
#2: Description of issues with traditional SLAAC addresses (embedding IEEE
identifiers)
Some folks have noted that this I-D should clarify what are the issues
with traditional SLAAC addresses (addresses that embed link-layer
addresses). This is deemed as key to clarify which of them are
Philipp,
I didn't really want to continue this debate as I have repeatedly stated my
views in my past responses, but if you like, I will once again explain it
from my point of view.
you seem to argue that privacy can only be mentioned if the protection is
absolute.
No, absolute is too a big
On 04/30/2013 12:38 PM, Hosnieh Rafiee wrote:
No, absolute is too a big word to use but the definition of the
relative is also much different than when using it in reference to
security. Unlike security where you can provide relative security
through the protection of one protocol and then
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6935
Title: IPv6 and UDP Checksums for
Tunneled Packets
Author: M. Eubanks, P. Chimento,
M. Westerlund
Status: Standards Track
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6936
Title: Applicability Statement for the Use
of IPv6 UDP Datagrams with Zero
Checksums
Author: G. Fairhurst, M. Westerlund
10 matches
Mail list logo