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 on the replacement of ripe-501 "Requirements for IPv6 in ICT equipment"
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last call on the replacement of ripe-501 "Requirements for IPv6 in ICT equipment"
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last call on the replacement of ripe-501 "Requirementsfor IPv6 in ICT equipment"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jan Zorz @ go6.si
jan at go6.si
Fri Oct 21 22:49:28 CEST 2011
On 10/20/11 8:22 PM, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: > Hi all, > > I noticed [I-D.ymbk-aplusp] on the list, which recently became RFC 6346. Hi, Sorry for late response. I thought I updated that (as co-author of that RFC it is expected to be aware of that change :) ) but it looks like it got lost between the versions somewhere. I suggest we corect that in final version. > Besides updating the list, do you find it appropriate to include RFCs > with experimental status? Why not? I agree not putting it into mandatory, but it could stay as optional, specially because it's architecture RFC and covers many flavors of A+P :) > > Also 3484bis is still in draft. > If we include drafts, then 6204 should also be changed to 6204bis. > Although i would prefer to have the final RFCs in. No, drafts are probably not ok. /jan
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last call on the replacement of ripe-501 "Requirements for IPv6 in ICT equipment"
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Last call on the replacement of ripe-501 "Requirementsfor IPv6 in ICT equipment"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]