On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 01:09 +0300, Mikko Saarnivala wrote:
> I couldn't agree more with Zach's and Carsten's comments about
> RFC4861 
> being link-specific. And don't get me wrong nd-06 still might have
> some 
> problems as Jonathan pointed out - those problems obviously have to
> be 
> sorted out.

So if there are still problems we shouldn't use a WGLC to sort them out.


_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

Reply via email to