Subject: RE: Solicit comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
Ron,
Sorry if this has already been asked. But why change icmp ehco request
if IND is mandated and is multicast?
Jeff
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Pashby
Savola
Cc: Jari Arkko; ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Solicit comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
Agreed. However, if it is mandatory then there is more of a leg to stand
on in requiring it.
-Original Message-
From: Pekka Savola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday
Agreed.
--Jari
Pekka Savola wrote:
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
Yes, but that is experimental so it is not mandatory to implement
either. So, again I say there is no mandatory way in which a network
management application can reliably discover IPv6 networks.
comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
> Yes, but that is experimental so it is not mandatory to implement
> either. So, again I say there is no mandatory way in which a network
> management application can
On Wed, 28 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
Yes, but that is experimental so it is not mandatory to implement
either. So, again I say there is no mandatory way in which a network
management application can reliably discover IPv6 networks. This is
why the draft recommends making
Savola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 1:47
To: Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35
Cc: Jari Arkko; ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Solicit comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
> These hosts will st
: Monday, September 26, 2005 1:53
To: Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35
Cc: Jari Arkko; ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Solicit comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
There are many networks that devices do not through routers. So
comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
> There are many networks that devices do not through routers. So
> asking the router for their addresses is not sufficient.
So, in these cases using the link-local all-hosts mul
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
There are many networks that devices do not through routers. So
asking the router for their addresses is not sufficient.
So, in these cases using the link-local all-hosts multicast address
should be fine?
--
Pekka Savola
Subject: RE: Solicit comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
>> 2) Requiring all nodes implement Inverse Neighbor Discover with the
>> addidtion of the response holdoff timer.
>>
> The feature exi
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Pashby, Ronald W CTR NSWCDD-B35 wrote:
2) Requiring all nodes implement Inverse Neighbor Discover with the
addidtion of the response holdoff timer.
The feature exists. But an all-nodes mandatory implementation
requirement is additional functionality, and I'm not sure
there'
: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Solicit comments on
draft-pashby-ipv6-network-discovery-00.txt
Hi,
Some quick comments:
I think its valuable to work on limits to ensure that
existing mechanisms don't cause denial-of-service or
flooding.
> Good
> network security mandates good network
Hi,
Some quick comments:
I think its valuable to work on limits to ensure that
existing mechanisms don't cause denial-of-service or
flooding.
Good
network security mandates good network management for detecting
unauthorized devices on the network.
It would seem that the recommended mechanis
13 matches
Mail list logo
