On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wasn't this already answered? > > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif/current/msg01784.html > > That points out the issues in 4191.
The message only stated that the draft defined improved RIO and two other options, but did not answer why we need this. I record and check the Paris meeting minutes when the DHCP route option draft was discussed. The consensus was the group should continue to work on this problem, but whether we continue with the DHCP approach was not resolved. ND extension may be a potential approach. But before that I agree with chair that everybody would like to know why existing approaches do not work. Regards, Zhen >> Hi, Behcet, >> >> I would only like to see the presentation about how 4191 can not solve the >> issue about multiple interfaces, not about proposal. >> we can discuss it during the preparation time. >> >> thanks >> >> -Hui >> >> 2012/7/19 Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2...@gmail.com> >> >>> Hi Hui, >>> >>> Please see inline. >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:08 AM, Hui Deng <denghu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hello authors, >>>> >>>> I recall that there was discussion on this draft, but haven't finished, >>> can >>>> you help to clarify further on this? >>>> >>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif/current/msg01785.html >>>> >>> We don't think that there is a problem with RFC 4191. >>> However, latest developments like the advent of multiple interfaced >>> smart phones and multi-homed hosts bring the need to add a few new RA >>> options. >>> That's all. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Behcet >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> -Hui >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/7/11 Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2...@gmail.com> >>>>> A new version of I-D, draft-sarikaya-mif-6man-ra-route-01.txt >>>>> has been successfully submitted by Behcet Sarikaya and posted to the >>>>> IETF repository. >>>>> >>>>> Filename: draft-sarikaya-mif-6man-ra-route >>>>> Revision: 01 >>>>> Title: IPv6 RA Options for Multiple Interface Next Hop Routes >>>>> Creation date: 2012-07-10 >>>>> WG ID: Individual Submission >>>>> Number of pages: 9 >>>>> URL: >>>>> >>>>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sarikaya-mif-6man-ra-route-01.txt >>>>> Status: >>>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sarikaya-mif-6man-ra-route >>>>> Htmlized: >>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sarikaya-mif-6man-ra-route-01 >>>>> Diff: >>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-sarikaya-mif-6man-ra-route-01 >>>>> >>>>> Abstract: >>>>> This draft defines new Router Advertisement options for configuring >>>>> next hop routes on the mobile or fixed nodes. Using these options, >>>>> an operator can easily configure nodes with multiple interfaces (or >>>>> otherwise multi-homed) to enable them to select the routes to a >>>>> destination. Each option is defined together with definitions of >>>>> host and router behaviors. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The IETF Secretariat >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> mif mailing list >>>>> mif@ietf.org >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif >>>> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mif mailing list >> mif@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif > _______________________________________________ > mif mailing list > mif@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif _______________________________________________ mif mailing list mif@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
