* David Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> We're not pushing this in, even the ipv6 working group is unsure
> how this should be handled and one of the possibilities they might
> choose matches how things currently are.
Alright, I'll drop this one from the -stable radar, thanks.
-chris
-
To unsub
* YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Fri, 11 May 2007 09:22:43 -0700), Chris
> Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
> > * YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > The "fix" for emerging security threats was overkill and it broke
>
* YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Chris, I think it is okay, but
> please wait for Dave's approval.
Alright, will do.
thanks,
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Fri, 11 May 2007 09:22:43 -0700), Chris
Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
> * YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > The "fix" for emerging security threats was overkill and it broke
> > basic semantic of IPv6 routing header processing. We shoul
* YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The "fix" for emerging security threats was overkill and it broke
> basic semantic of IPv6 routing header processing. We should assume
> RT0 (or even RT2, depends on configuration) as "unknown" RH type so
> that we
> - silently ignore the rou
