On Mon, 2004-05-10 at 08:20, Tim Chown wrote:
> I agree. This point has been made in previous discussions of the draft...
I agree as well. There are environments where load balancing is
desirable and environments where is is not desirable. MAY is the right
word for this circumstance.
tim
I agree. This point has been made in previous discussions of the draft...
Tim
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 03:37:24PM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> i have problem understanding the intent of first paragraph of section 2.
>
> >When a host chooses from multiple equivalent routers, it
i have problem understanding the intent of first paragraph of section 2.
>When a host chooses from multiple equivalent routers, it SHOULD
>support choosing using some method which distributes load for
>different destinations among the equivalent routers rather than
>always choosing the sam
This starts an IPv6 WG Last Call for advancing the following draft as
a Proposed Standard
Title : IPv6 Host to Router Load Sharing
Author(s) : R. Hinden, D. Thaler
Filename: draft-ietf-ipv6-host-load-sharing-02.txt
Pages : 6
Date
