Dan Lanciani wrote:
There doesn't seem to be any obvious reason other than third-party control
to consider specific stability time frames. Therefore, I suggest that the
only reasonable life for a stable address is, to a first approximation,
infinite.
I must admit that this seems to follow from my
Fred Templin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|Brian,
|
|For the most part, agree with all of your points of clarification;
|thanks. One item for further discussion:
|
|Brian Haberman wrote:
|
|>>
|>> Long period of time, perhaps, but how long is difficult to
|>> quantify. Again, perhaps this is a quest
Brian,
For the most part, agree with all of your points of clarification;
thanks. One item for further discussion:
Brian Haberman wrote:
Long period of time, perhaps, but how long is difficult to
quantify. Again, perhaps this is a question for the [BAKER]
renumbering draft.
I think it is quite
below...
Andrew White wrote:
>
> As the originator of section 4.8, I'll speak to this one...
>
> Fred Templin wrote:
> >
> > > 4.8 I'm afraid I couldn't understand this scenario at all. When the
> > > two sites connect, do they essentially merge into a single,
> > > multi-homed site?
> >
> > I
Fred Templin wrote:
Brian,
Thanks for sending the detailed comments. Will give a first-pass
at them below, but may require a couple of iterations.
Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian Haberman wrote:
[WG chair hat off]
Below are my comments on the Hain/Templin draft. Globally,
I think that these goa
As the originator of section 4.8, I'll speak to this one...
Fred Templin wrote:
>
> > 4.8 I'm afraid I couldn't understand this scenario at all. When the
> > two sites connect, do they essentially merge into a single,
> > multi-homed site?
>
> I believe the answer to this is yes, and I believe
Hello Ralph,
Thanks for the comments; please see my responses below:
Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ralph Droms wrote:
Here are my comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt...
Global organization - as I read the doc (others' reactions may differ), I
feel like I'm reading a doc
Brian,
Thanks for sending the detailed comments. Will give a first-pass
at them below, but may require a couple of iterations.
Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian Haberman wrote:
[WG chair hat off]
Below are my comments on the Hain/Templin draft. Globally,
I think that these goals are worthwhile for t
Here are my comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt...
Global organization - as I read the doc (others' reactions may differ), I
feel like I'm reading a document that is based on some assumptions about the
solution before describing the problem. In particular, the firs
[WG chair hat off]
Below are my comments on the Hain/Templin draft. Globally,
I think that these goals are worthwhile for the entire IPv6
protocol suite. This type of functionality is needed in order
for people to feel comfortable migrating from v4 to v6.
Goals for an Addressing Scheme to Supp
10 matches
Mail list logo
