Brian E Carpenter wrote:
It's expired. Try
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
The draft describes an option to be included in the RA. However,
section 4 calls it a "NDP Expansion Option", meaning this option could
be included in - other than RA - NDP messages(?
Alain,
Any legacy host that didn't support the new option also
wouldn't know how to support anything defined in the
extension space. So I don't think there is a problem with
legacy hosts.
One thing I found unclear from the draft was if the 'legacy' bits
will be 'ported' or not to the new spac
> -Original Message-
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> RFC2461, Section 4.2 says the following about new options:
>
>Future versions of this protocol may define new option types.
>Receivers MUST silently ignore any options they do not
> recognize
>
Bob
So, at this point, I do not support this draft.
- Alain.
-Original Message-
From: Brian Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 12:41 PM
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: WG Request: Adopt draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
All,
This is
Good afternoon all,
>From: "Durand, Alain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/02/05 Mon AM 11:14:10 CST
>To: Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ipv6@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: WG Request: Adopt draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
>I would like to ask wh
Good afternoon all,
>From: "Durand, Alain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 2007/02/05 Mon AM 11:14:10 CST
>To: Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ipv6@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: WG Request: Adopt draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
>I would like to ask wh
ssage-
> From: Brian Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 12:41 PM
> To: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: WG Request: Adopt draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
>
> All,
> This is a formal call to request IPv6 WG feedback on
> adopting the
Hi Brian,
I fully support this draft becoming a WG document.
Cheers
Suresh
Brian Haberman wrote:
All,
This is a formal call to request IPv6 WG feedback on adopting the
below draft. The premise of the draft is to expand the flags field that
is quickly running out of bits.
Please pr
Brian Haberman wrote:
All, This is a formal call to request IPv6 WG feedback on adopting
the below draft. The premise of the draft is to expand the flags
field that is quickly running out of bits.
Please provide your preference (positive or negative) on having this
document become an IPv6 WG do
It's expired. Try
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-haberman-ipv6-ra-flags-option-00.txt
Brian
On 2007-02-04 06:37, Guilherme Sperb Machado wrote:
The draft link is not working. How can I read the proposed draft?
Thanks in advance,
Guilherme Sperb Machado
On 2/2/07, Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PR
The draft link is not working. How can I read the proposed draft?
Thanks in advance,
Guilherme Sperb Machado
On 2/2/07, Brian Haberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All,
This is a formal call to request IPv6 WG feedback on adopting the
below draft. The premise of the draft is to expand the f
All,
This is a formal call to request IPv6 WG feedback on adopting the
below draft. The premise of the draft is to expand the flags field that
is quickly running out of bits.
Please provide your preference (positive or negative) on having
this document become an IPv6 WG document. Comme
12 matches
Mail list logo
