On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
Hi Brian,
I was not referring only to IPv6 (which is bad not have it working in any
case), but also to IPv4. It was not working for me in most of the meeting
rooms, most of the time (today seems to be fine) and talking to many people,
they had the
My understanding is that even not considering Austria, the connectivity has
been much better in the last meetings (not counting this and the W DC one).
I also agree that 1 year is much better than just one week, but one week
on-site, plus several months up-front for planning, PLUS SEVERAL IETFs
PROTECTED]
CC: ietf@ietf.org ietf@ietf.org
Asunto: Re:IETF62 Network and Terminal Room Information
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
Hi Brian,
I was not referring only to IPv6 (which is bad not have it working in any
case), but also to IPv4. It was not working for me
I also think that removing IPv6 didn't helped AT ALL and if IPv6 is not good
for those APs (and can be confirmed), then we have a coordination problem
here (well the maker has it also from another point of view).
Actually when the DHCP was down the first days, I was still able to work,
thanks to
I think my experience with the wireless network was on the lower end
of the scale, perhaps in part due to the fact that I am using an older
laptop and Cisco 340 card with 802.11b only. I also run FreeBSD, so
that put me outside the norms. The wireless network worked great on
Saturday and most of
Hi,
I will like to ask the responsible/s of setting up the IETF network to make
sure that we don't have again, a situation like we had this week, when the
network was not working most of the time, and no IPv6 available.
There was already some problems in the last IETF, and it seems to me that
