> Following the discussions, it isn't entirely clear to me why we
> could need to open this issue.  I think that there is concensus
> for keeping it as is (as described in Christian's mail).
> 
> Am I missing something?

Hi John, I don't think you are missing anything. Besides, I don't 
have a hard stance to open this issue. What I said *open* is just 
for moving M/O flags document forward as author of this document 
because this issue occured during this thread although several 
documents (Node requirements, 2462-bis and etc.) already decided 
their stance IMO. I think I should listen for various opinions of this 
issue in conjunction with M/O flags document (neither Node 
requirement nor 2462-bis). 

Thanks.

- Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
- Mobile Platform Lab. Samsung Electronics.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to