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]/
[ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michael Schneider/calispera.com
michael.schneider at calispera.com
Mon Nov 8 19:51:09 CET 2010
Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote on 08.11.2010 19:02:29: > On 8.11.10 11:31, Marc Blanchet wrote: > > does not make sense to me. > > > > 6PE and 6VPE are two ways to run IPv6 over MPLS network, but are not the only > > ones. Therefore, it can not be mandatory. > What do you suggest? Re-wording, add additional mechanisms or move it to > optional section? > Basically it is written "If requested by tender initiator...", that makes it as > a choice... Hi, LDPv6 was a dream, but only in draft status [1] this time. So i don`t know where is a right place for it. [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-manral-mpls-ldp-ipv6-04 Regards Michael
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]