I agree, Ted.
-Original Message-
From: Ted Lemon
Date: Friday, February 1, 2013 10:49 AM
To: Chuck Anderson
Cc: Rajiv Asati , "dh...@ietf.org" ,
Brian Hamacher , Philipp Kern ,
"ipv6@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] MAC Address Tracking via DHCP6
>On Feb 1, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Chuck Ande
lients--only the DHCPv6 Relay Agent.
>
>On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 02:56:03PM +, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) wrote:
>> Hi Maglione,
>>
>> Thanks for your review and a good question.
>>
>> draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration introduces a new IPv6 Neighbor
>>Dis
draft-ietf-dhc-addr-registration-00?
>
>Thanks
>Regards,
>Roberta
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
>Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 6:27 PM
>To: Philipp Kern; Brian Hamacher
>C
There is a better way out to track the IPv6 addresses used by the hosts
(via SLAAC or static) -
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-asati-dhc-ipv6-autoconfig-address-tracking
Cheers,
Rajiv
-Original Message-
From: Philipp Kern
Organization: The Debian Project (http://www.debian.org)
Date:
Indeed, and I see a sheer wastage in blocking the entire /64 whose one /127 is
used on p2p links.
There are many deployments that already assign bunch of /64 (or lower) prefixes
per hierarchy and encode bunch of useful info in 72-96 and then assign
thousands of /127s out of each /96 (or encode
Support
Cheers,
Rajiv
Sent from my Phone
On Jun 13, 2012, at 7:08 AM, "Randy Bush" wrote:
> i have slogged through it and support publication as ps
>
> randy
>
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Adminis
+1 for option 3 with hyphen.
I like to be able to read the URI without having to put my glasses on.
Cheers,
Rajiv
Sent from my Phone
On May 4, 2012, at 3:50 AM, "t.petch" wrote:
> Brian
>
> To me, Option 3 is the clear, right way to go.
>
> Percent escaping is the purist answer, fine for U
Hi Lorenzo,
Sorry about the delayed response (and thanks to Hemant for pointing this
out). Pls see inline,
> A couple of points that the draft doesn't explain:
>
> - Why can't the node simply retry DAD without the nonce option?
The node could simply do so, however, it wouldn't be able to
