ugbarton.us";
> href="mailto:do...@dougbarton.us";>do...@dougbarton.us] Sent: Friday, June
> 18, 2010 9:42 AM
> To: Fortune HUANG
> Cc: > ymailto="mailto:ipv6@ietf.org";
> href="mailto:ipv6@ietf.org";>ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Questio
s]
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 9:42 AM
To: Fortune HUANG
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Question about SLAAC: how the host determines the prefixes
allocated from different prefix pools
On 06/17/10 17:39, Fortune HUANG wrote:
Since the service type of the prefix should be classified to the
prefix
On 06/17/10 19:31, Fortune HUANG wrote:
Hi Doug,
Please note that "Fortune HUANG wants it to be that way" has never
been used as any kind of reason in this discussion by myself.
Actually that's the only justification you've provided so far.
so please respond to my reason as you quoted below
ge-
From: Doug Barton [mailto:do...@dougbarton.us]
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 9:42 AM
To: Fortune HUANG
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Question about SLAAC: how the host determines the prefixes
allocated from different prefix pools
On 06/17/10 17:39, Fortune HUANG wrote:
> Since the service
On 06/17/10 17:39, Fortune HUANG wrote:
Since the service type of the prefix should be classified to the
prefix related configuration, it should be carried in RA
... and what Mark, myself, and everyone else who have +1'ed our
statements is saying is that "Fortune HUANG wants it to be that way"
June 08, 2010 10:34 PM
> To: Fortune HUANG
> Cc: 'JOSHI, SHRINIVAS ASHOK (SHRINIVAS ASHOK)'; ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Question about SLAAC: how the host determines the prefixes
> allocated from different prefix pools
>
> So if you look at section 10 of RFC3484 you'
ne
-Original Message-
From: Tim Chown [mailto:t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 10:34 PM
To: Fortune HUANG
Cc: 'JOSHI, SHRINIVAS ASHOK (SHRINIVAS ASHOK)'; ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Question about SLAAC: how the host determines the prefixes
allocated from dif
al Message-
> From: Tim Chown [mailto:t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 4:53 PM
> To: Fortune HUANG
> Cc: 'JOSHI, SHRINIVAS ASHOK (SHRINIVAS ASHOK)'; ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Question about SLAAC: how the host determines the prefixes
>
rtune
-Original Message-
From: Tim Chown [mailto:t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 4:53 PM
To: Fortune HUANG
Cc: 'JOSHI, SHRINIVAS ASHOK (SHRINIVAS ASHOK)'; ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Question about SLAAC: how the host determines the prefixes
allocated from differe
On 8 Jun 2010, at 09:44, Fortune HUANG wrote:
>
> I don't have any preference to use RA over DHCPv6, but I would be grateful
> if you could tell me the guidance to decide whether to deploy SLAAC or
> DHCPv6.
> Obviously, SLAAC can not work as expected in the scenario in my example. So
> this see
SLAAC: how the host determines the prefixes
allocated from different prefix pools
Fortune,
As per RFC 4862 "section 5.5.3. Router Advertisement Processing of RFC"
STB should generate two global addresses.
Please note Prefix Information Option in Router Advertisement does not
contain a w
Fortune,
As per RFC 4862 "section 5.5.3. Router Advertisement Processing of RFC"
STB should generate two global addresses.
Please note Prefix Information Option in Router Advertisement does not contain
a way to associate a prefix with a service.
DHCPv6 will be a better option to request an IPv
12 matches
Mail list logo
