Dear all,
I fully agree with Rajiv.
I would like to add to the list of stateless solutions the proposal specified
in: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-behave-ipv6-portrange-04 and its
companion I-D:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-dhcpv6-shared-address-option-01.
I support to adopt all.
Mingwei
=== 2011-08-20 22:21:16 您在来信中写道：===
Hi folks,
Following our rough concensus during Quebec City meeting and
according to our charter/milestones, the chairs would like to
ask the mailing list for the confirmation to adopt the following
drafts:
Hi,
I support the adoption for draft 1, 2, 3, 5 to WG items.
Regards,
Yu
-Original Message-
From: softwires-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:softwires-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Yong Cui
Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2011 10:21 PM
To: softwires@ietf.org
Cc: Yong Cui
Subject: [Softwires]
I support all of them.
Jie Hu
-邮件原件-
发件人: softwires-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:softwires-boun...@ietf.org] 代表
Eleven Fu(Yu)
发送时间: 2011年8月22日 16:33
收件人: Yong Cui; softwires@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Softwires] New working group documents
Hi,
I support the adoption for draft 1, 2, 3, 5 to WG
Hi,
I support the adoption of multicast and stateless motivation drafts: 3,
4 and 5.
Cheers,
Gao feng
Yong Cui cuiy...@tsinghua.edu.cn
发件人: softwires-boun...@ietf.org
2011-08-20 22:21
收件人
softwires@ietf.org
抄送
Yong Cui cuiy...@tsinghua.edu.cn
主题
[Softwires] New working group
+1, support adopting all.
Xiaohong
|-Original Message-
|From: Mingwei Xu [mailto:x...@cernet.edu.cn]
|Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 2:34 PM
|To: Yong Cui; softwires@ietf.org
|Cc: Yong Cui
|Subject: Re: [Softwires] New working group documents
|
|I support to adopt all.
|
|Mingwei
|
|
Dear all,
I'm in favor of adopting the 5 drafts listed below as softwire WG documents.
Cheers,
Christian.
-Message d'origine-
De : softwires-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:softwires-boun...@ietf.org] De la part
de Yong Cui
Envoyé : samedi 20 août 2011 16:21
À : softwires@ietf.org
Cc : Yong
I'm in favour adopting 1, 4 and 5. No opinion at the moment regarding 2 and 3.
Thx
Olaf
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: softwires-boun...@ietf.org
[mailto:softwires-boun...@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Yong Cui
Gesendet: Samstag, 20. August 2011 16:21
An: softwires@ietf.org
Cc: Yong Cui
Dear Chairs,
I suggest including draft-murakami-softwire-4v6-translation-00 into
the agenda as well.
We already had a presentation in last softwire meeting. It's
reasonable to continue the discussion in the interim meeting
Many thanks
Gang
2011/8/19, Yong Cui cuiy...@tsinghua.edu.cn:
Hi
Mark Townsley wrote, on 08/21/2011 10:19 AM:
It takes me about 30 seconds to describe at a high-level what 4rd is to
someone
who already understands ds-lite by referring to it as a stateless version of
ds-lite. That's a good thing.
To someone who already understands 6rd:
4rd is to IPv4
Dear Brian,
Ahah, you seem to assume that A+P will solve the ISP's shortage
of IPv4 addresses. That may be true for a year or three, but
after that they will discover that they have to CGN their A+P
customers, and then you have NAT444 after all, IMHO.
I don't assume A+P an ultimate solution
Are there any plans to discuss solutions for multicast at the interim meeting?
Thanks,
Greg
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 3:57 AM, GangChen phdg...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Chairs,
I suggest including draft-murakami-softwire-4v6-translation-00 into
the agenda as well.
We already had a presentation
As we mentioned earlier, the softwire interim meeting will focus on 'stateless
solutions'. If you'd like to present there, please send the chairs a note by
Friday this week.
Alain.
___
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org
Dear Cameron,
some pressure. IMHO, i believe that static over-subscription ratios
required by A+P will not meaningfully keep pace with the rapid growth
in the number of internet nodes.
I would be very happy if you elaborated on this. Can you give something
to support this belief?
Thanks,
Sure. The question is really whether its market share would be
enough to justify the effort.
But how can you know what the market share is? I mean, it's a
trade-off between having a smaller sharing ratio and having better
end-to-end (perhaps), direct CPE-CPE communication ... I say let's
give
Thanks. I won't add to the agenda. The first pass had mcast on the
list so I carved out time to be there. If it comes up I will attend.
Or I suppose more to the point, if you don't want me there keep mcast
off of the agenda. :)
Cheers,
Greg
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Alain Durand
2011/8/22 Nejc Škoberne n...@skoberne.net:
Dear Cameron,
some pressure. IMHO, i believe that static over-subscription ratios
required by A+P will not meaningfully keep pace with the rapid growth
in the number of internet nodes.
I would be very happy if you elaborated on this. Can you give
Dear Chairs:
Are there any plans to discuss the MIBs at the interim meeting? According
to our softwire WG milestones, our MIBs also need more discussions.
Best Regards
Yu
-Original Message-
From: softwires-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:softwires-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Alain
Hi all,
In IETF-81, the chairs asked the authors of different drafts on multicast sit
together to discuss and compromise. So we did.
Here are some comments on draft-qin-softwire-dslite-multicast-04.
Overall: if this is to be a Standards Track document, the whole document
has to be reviewed,
19 matches
Mail list logo
