This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Masataka Ohta
mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Tue Jun 22 16:51:45 CEST 2004
Kurt Erik Lindqvist; >>>>It is explicitly stated in my draft, which is 3 pages long: >>>> >>>> It is expected that NLIs have multiple prefixes each belonging to >>>> multiple TLAs, all of which is delegated to sites. >>>> >>>>NLI is an acronym of "Next Level ISP". >> >>>Yes? And if the end host selects an address that belongs to a TLI that >>>has a internal network failure and the traffic is blaockholed in that >>>providers network, how does the end node find out? TCP timeout? >> >>Read the draft of end to end multihoming. > > > Ok, so you are actually proposing that we I'm actually proposing that you read the draft, if you are interested in multi6 issues. Then, if you have any question, ask, hopefully with proper quoting of the draft. Masataka Ohta
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]