Markus Stenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
`   > - implemented (and also somewhat tested) 6rd, dslite, map, lw4o6
    > transition mechanisms

I assume that this is all WAN/uplink interface things.
(vs ways to get IPv6 through IPv4 only internal routers...)

    > And at some point it would be nice to have also:
    > - multicast (sitelocal)
    > - UPnP (IGD perhaps via proxy, rest via multicast and/or proxy)

    > However, this brings to my mind a thing I’ve been meaning to ask the
    > list for a while now.

    > What is the take on hncp-00 draft format? Should the strictly optional

Are you asking specifically about the TLV format, rather than
contents/semantics?



--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: pgpX9aMzFefM8.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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

Reply via email to