Re: [Taps] IPv6 address usage problem statement?

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018, Fernando Gont wrote: I agree with that. However, there are scenarios in which, unfortunately, you might need to limit application choice: some enterprise deployments are known for that: disabling support for temporary addresses is a widespread practice in such deployments.

Re: [Taps] IPv6 address usage problem statement?

On 02/28/2018 04:49 AM, Erik Kline wrote: >>> I think we should let >>> nodes create and use addresses as they see fit, and leave it to the >>> apps to figure out what they want to do (given the proper information >>> via useful APIs). >> >> The above said (i.e., the note will be removed in the

Re: [Taps] IPv6 address usage problem statement?

On 02/13/2018 08:30 PM, Erik Kline wrote: > On 13 February 2018 at 15:15, Fernando Gont wrote: >> Hello, Tommy, >> >> On 02/13/2018 08:04 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote: >>> Yes, I think this topic is very relevant to the work that can be done in >>> updated transport APIs,

Re: [Taps] IPv6 address usage problem statement?

Hello, Tommy, On 02/13/2018 08:04 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote: > Yes, I think this topic is very relevant to the work that can be done in > updated transport APIs, specifically around Path Selection. This is > relevant both for initial connection establishment (when we’re racing > various transport