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] We suggest that RIPE-554bis CPE equipment requires RFC 7084 and CE-Router Logo. Thank you!

Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [Marketing Mail] Re: We suggest that RIPE-554bis CPE equipment requires RFC 7084 and CE-Router Logo. Thank you!
Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] New on RIPE Labs: IPv4 and IPv6 Tweets on a Map

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Wilhelm Boeddinghaus wilhelm at boeddinghaus.de
Fri Jan 9 09:57:15 CET 2015

Am 09.01.2015 um 09:22 schrieb Jan Zorz @ go6.si:
> On 07/01/15 11:38, Ole Troan wrote:
>> there are at least eight IETF solutions (L2TP, DS-lite, 464XLAT,
>> Public 4over6, Lightweight 4over6, 4rd, MAP-T, MAP-E) to the same
>> problem (IPv4 or shared IPv4 over IPv6). it's going to be interesting
>> to figure out how 554bis should deal with that.
>
> Hi,
>
> my first thought would be to put them in Optional section? :)
>
> What do you think or suggest?
>
> Cheers, Jan
>
Hi,

Yes, put them in the optional section. I don't think many vendors want 
to implement all of them in their CPE routers. If we put too many 
technologies in the "mandatory" section, the vendors will ignore the 
document and it becomes useless.

Cheers, Wilhelm

Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [Marketing Mail] Re: We suggest that RIPE-554bis CPE equipment requires RFC 7084 and CE-Router Logo. Thank you!
Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] New on RIPE Labs: IPv4 and IPv6 Tweets on a Map

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ ipv6-wg Archives ]