Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND

To: Geoff Mulligan <geoff at proto6.com>
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo at tzi.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:55:01 +0200
Cc: '6lowpan' <6lowpan at ietf.org>
Delivered-to: 6lowpan at core3.amsl.com
In-reply-to: <1255473631.4525.1250.camel at dellx1>
List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan>
List-help: <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:6lowpan@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <B6DBCBF27DEB1047AD57F03F217B106155FB0E at XMB-AMS-113.cisco.com> <002301ca4b5b$84155c60$8c401520$ at com> <B6DBCBF27DEB1047AD57F03F217B10615AF9C0 at XMB-AMS-113.cisco.com> <000901ca4c0c$38229730$a867c590$ at com> <4AD4B5B4.7080503 at sics.se> <004d01ca4c50$12d1bb70$38753250$ at com> <957402EF-EDC0-4A43-B7C8-0DD52ADA2502 at archrock.com> <005301ca4c54$5fd1cfb0$1f756f10$ at com> <1255473631.4525.1250.camel at dellx1>

On Oct 14, 2009, at 00:40, Geoff Mulligan wrote:

I'm not sure why they need to defend an address.

Well, the short answer is that it wouldn't be 4861 any more if theydidn't.

But I'm getting ahead of myself -- the "does anybody really need DAD"thread is only scheduled for Friday :-)

Let's talk about NUD now (in the other thread).

Gruesse, Carsten

References:
- [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Julien Abeille (jabeille)
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Colin O'Flynn
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Julien Abeille (jabeille)
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Colin O'Flynn
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Adam Dunkels
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Colin O'Flynn
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Jonathan Hui
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Colin O'Flynn
- Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
  - From: Geoff Mulligan

Prev by Date: Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
Next by Date: Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental assumptions of 6lowpan-nd-06: (2) NUD is kind of covered, or is it?
Previous by thread: Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
Next by thread: Re: [6lowpan] Fundamental concerns about 6lowpan ND
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.