that they will bother fixing the
problem with the specification, the specification might be labeled an
Experimental RFC.
BR,
Edwin Cordeiro
NIC.br
Em 19/05/14 14:04, Petersen, Matt J escreveu:
This may be a silly question or a lack of my understanding, but why an
experimental RFC over just a Standard RFC
Hi all,
I'd like your feedback about the draft.
I'd also wanted the feedback if this draft should be adopted by the
group, moved to another group or proceed as an individual submission.
Thanks,
Edwin Cordeiro
NIC.br
Mensagem original
Assunto:New Version Notification
I reviewed this draft and support it's adoption.
Some comments about it:
- I believe there is a typo error: typed sixRdSecurityCeck instead of
sixRdSecurityCheck all over the draft
- In the introduction, shouldn't it be explicit that this same MIB
supports both CPE and BR?
Regards,
Edwin
Em
Hi,
I'd like to request a slot:
Edwin Cordeiro
Experience from MAP-T Testing
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-cordeiro-softwire-experience-mapt-01
10 minutes
Thanks,
Edwin Cordeiro
IPv6 Evangelist
NIC.br
Em 09/07/13 07:54, Yong Cui escreveu:
Hi folks,
We will have our Softwires session
happened with 6rd. If this
code already exist, please make it public so it could be verified.
Edwin Cordeiro
Em 26-04-2012 06:50, Mark Townsley escreveu:
Because of the history of MAP and 4rd-U, we will designate independent teams
of volunteer reviewers to advise the working group about the state
Dear Softwire wg members:
At the Paris IETF Softwire meeting, we had presentations on MAP (taken as a
whole) and
4rd-U. We got very strong feedback that we needed to select one
solution to cover that full stateless case, not two, and that we should make
this
decision relatively quickly.
