On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, Joe Touch wrote:
JT> I'm including INTAREA in the discussion because this doc seems to be an
JT> end-run around intending to deprecate IPv6 HBH options, or at least to
JT> redefine the option behavior bits defined in RFC 2460. IMO, that ought to be
JT> addressed in INTAREA, not
Hi, all,
I'm including INTAREA in the discussion because this doc seems to be an
end-run around intending to deprecate IPv6 HBH options, or at least to
redefine the option behavior bits defined in RFC 2460. IMO, that ought
to be addressed in INTAREA, not V6OPS.
IMO, the real DOS attack here
On Wed, 16 Jul 2014, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> The problem with both of these great inventions is that a single
> box on the path that takes the "drop" option breaks everything,
In that same vein, I wanted to object to this:
| 2.3.6. Destination Options for IPv6 (Number=60)
|
| 2.3.6.1. Uses
Dear all,
Please find this reminder for IPR compliance.
If you see any, then please let the WG know.
Brgds,
G/
From: opsec-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:opsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of KK
Sent: 24 March 2013 20:39
To: opsec@ietf.org;
Subject: [OPSEC] DON'T PANIC: Reminder about IPR relating to
