> A example of deprecation that is close to what we are discussing
> regarding fragmentation can be found in:
>
>This document formally deprecates the IPv6 site-local unicast prefix
>defined in [RFC3513], i.e., 111011 binary or FEC0::/10. The
>special behavior of this prefix MUST
On Jul 30, 2013, at 5:19 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> At the mike a moment ago, I referred to an existing formal definition
>> of "deprecate".
>
> welll, you keep saying it is a formal definition, implying that it
> applies to all uses of the term. but, in fact, the reference is merely
> how it is
Hi All,
Many thanks to the people who commented on my draft.
Here are my responses. There was not enough time to respond to all comments
and it was difficult to discern and follow the comments one by one from the
audio tape. I had to listen to the audio repeatedly before I could put the
con
> At the mike a moment ago, I referred to an existing formal definition
> of "deprecate".
welll, you keep saying it is a formal definition, implying that it
applies to all uses of the term. but, in fact, the reference is merely
how it is used in some snmp glorp.
otoh, the draft under abuse, coul
Roland,
On 30/07/2013 01:41, Roland Bless wrote:
> Hi,
> On 19.07.2013 00:11, Bob Hinden wrote:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-ug-01
>>
>> as a Proposed Standard. Substantive comments and statements of support for
>> advancing this document should be directed to the mailin
Hosnieh,
You can watch/listen to the comments again from the Meetecho recording. It
will be available at:
http://ietf87.conf.meetecho.com/index.php/Recorded_Sessions
Bob
On Jul 29, 2013, at 4:16 PM, Hosnieh Rafiee wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Would you please send us your comments so that I can
Hi,
Just to restate what I said on the microphone. Section 7.1. says:
When the ARO is used by hosts an SLLA option MUST be included and the
address that is to be registered MUST be the IPv6 source address of
the Neighbor Solicitation message.
What about link that do not have link-layer
At the mike a moment ago, I referred to an existing formal definition of
"deprecate". For the record, the reference is to RFC 1158, which reads:
3.1. Deprecated Objects
In order to better prepare implementors for future changes in the
MIB, a new term "deprecated" may be used when describi
Hello,
Would you please send us your comments so that I can answer them or consider
them. There was not time to respond all of them or to use the comments
improving the draft.
Thank you,
Best,
Hosnieh
IETF IPv6 working
Hi,
On 19.07.2013 00:11, Bob Hinden wrote:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6man-ug-01
>
> as a Proposed Standard. Substantive comments and statements of support for
> advancing this document should be directed to the mailing list. Editorial
> suggestions can be sent to the auth
Hi,
I would like to know whether you are available in IETF to meet and discuss
about SSAS (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rafiee-6man-ssas ). I created
some slides for 6man however I am in "if the time permits" so that I am not
sure I will be given a time slot to present it. Also if I have ti
11 matches
Mail list logo
