Colin,
thanks for the clarification.
geoff
On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 18:11 +0100, Colin O'Flynn wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just wanted to make sure it was publically recorded that what Carsten says
> is accurate. I consider the GHC draft a much better replacement for the
> ICMPv6-specific one. I have no plans on continuing work for the
> ICMPv6-specific one, indeed it is already out of date with the ND draft.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Colin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of Carsten Bormann
> Sent: March 1, 2011 8:30 AM
> To: Geoff Mulligan
> Cc: 6lowpan
> Subject: Re: [6lowpan] agenda for upcoming IETF
>
> It seems to me we will spend some time in Prague discussing the resolution
> of the ND-15 WGLC comments.
> (The WGLC ends on 2011-03-03, and the deadline for submission of an I-D
> update (non-00) is 2011-03-14.)
>
> Colin has said the GHC draft has essentially replaced his ICMP-specific one.
> I plan to submit a version of that draft that supplies text for the
> discovery/negotiation that was still outstanding in the version discussed in
> Beijing.
> (There also was some hallway discussion about ASCII compression -- I'll
> include something very simple, which we may or may not want to throw out
> again. Does anyone have nice packet samples for evaluating that?)
>
> Declaring victory after that sounds like an option.
>
> Gruesse, Carsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> 6lowpan mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
