On 2004-11-06, JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote:
>
> I'm very sorry for delaying the response...I could not have time to
> respond before you left for vacation, and have kept this thread
> sleeping in my mail box since then. I hope my silence was not a major
> showstoppper.
G'day Jin
Hello,
> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:16:39 +1000,
> "Nick 'Sharkey' Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> well, it's bad timing on the Last Call, unfortunately,
> because I'm off on vacation for five weeks starting today!
> Rhonda and I will be backpacking around in Scotland, Ireland
> and
In your previous mail you wrote:
This starts a 1 week IPv6 Working Group Last Call on advancing:
Title : Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection for
IPv6
=> I have two concerns about the draft:
- requirement level keywords are used only in section 3 but
On 2004-09-22, Brian Haberman wrote:
> All,
> This starts a 1 week IPv6 Working Group Last Call on advancing:
> Author(s) : N. Moore
> Filename : draft-ietf-ipv6-optimistic-dad-02.txt
G'day IPv6ers ...
well, it's bad timing on the Last Call, unfortunately,
because
On 2004-09-24, JINMEI Tatuya / [EMAIL PROTECTED]@C#:H wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if this version addresses the three points below I made
> in the previous last call (*)
> (*) http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/current/msg03082.html
Hi Jinmei,
Well, I'm glad it's managed to address t
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:49:02 -0400,
> Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> All,
> This starts a 1 week IPv6 Working Group Last Call on advancing:
> Title : Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection for
> IPv6
> Author(s) : N. Moore
> F
On 2004-09-23, Soliman, Hesham wrote:
>
> => Actually, just another comment on the same line in the draft,
> what kind of work is needed to allow for SEND and optDAD to coexist?
> SEND should make life easier for this proposal, what needs
> to be done?
On 2004-09-23, Jari Arkko wrote:
>
> I agre
On 2004-09-23, Pekka Savola wrote:
>
> 5. Security Considerations
>
>Further work will be required to integrate Optimistic DAD with Secure
>Neighbor Discovery [SEND].
>
> ==> sorry for not saying this earlier, but this seems unacceptable to
> me. SEND specs are already in the RFC-ed que
> One major comment:
>
>
> 5. Security Considerations
>
>Further work will be required to integrate Optimistic DAD
> with Secure
>Neighbor Discovery [SEND].
==> sorry for not saying this earlier, but this seems unacceptable to
me. SEND specs are already in the RFC-ed queue, and the WG has been
closed. This IMHO needs to be analyzed here. I.e., analyze and state
how oDAD interacts (or not) with SEND. AFAICS, there shouldn't be any
showstoppers here
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Brian Haberman wrote:
> This starts a 1 week IPv6 Working Group Last Call on advancing:
>
> Title : Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection for IPv6
> Author(s) : N. Moore
> Filename : draft-ietf-ipv6-optimistic-dad-02.txt
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
