In case people haven¹t had time to read the whole draft, the key standards
track change to existing RFC¹s is:

³An IPv6 receiver node SHOULD NOT drop a received IPv6 multicast
 message containing a multicast destination address in the IPv6
 header, but with a unicast destination address in the link-layer
 header, withstanding all other validity considerations as
 specified in the relevant IPv6 standards specifications.²

³An IPv6 sender node MAY choose to transmit an IPv6 multicast
 message as a link-layer unicast message.²

- Wes

On 7/31/10 1:54 AM, "Fred Baker" <[email protected]> wrote:

> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of
> draft-gundavelli-v6ops-l2-unicast. Please read it now. If you find nits
> (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the
> authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or
> finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments
> to the combined lists.
> 
> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the document as
> well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to be of
> operational utility, that is also an important comment to make.
>  
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [email protected]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to