Hi Med,
On 9/19/2022 2:21 PM, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
Hi Benoît,
Thank you for the follow-up.
Actually, the more I look into this, the more I’m convinced that we
don’t need a new registry for the flags and that the statement “Values
for this Information Element are listed in
Hi Med,
Benoit will feedback on your reply.
In the meanwhile I like to take the opportunity to get your feedback on an
additional operational consideration section I added based on an off list
feedback I received from a software developer implementing the draft document.
Hi Benoît,
Thank you for the follow-up.
Actually, the more I look into this, the more I’m convinced that we don’t need
a new registry for the flags and that the statement “Values for this
Information Element are listed in the "IPFIX IPv6 SRH Flags" registry” is
restrictive (inaccurate(?)).
Hi Chongfeng,
Thank you for the comments.
Please see inline.
Cheers,
Med
De : OPSAWG De la part de Chongfeng Xie
Envoyé : samedi 17 septembre 2022 02:21
À : opsawg@ietf.org
Objet : Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS
Hi, folks,
I support the adoption of this
