IP Version 6 Working Group Discussion Archive - Date Index

• Oct 28 2003
• Re: MTU handling and 2461bis, Brian Haberman
• Re: MTU handling and 2461bis, Fred Templin
• MTU handling and 2461bis, Soliman Hesham
• Oct 28 2003
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Greg Daley
• RE: Router selection dead?, Dave Thaler
• I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-flow-label-08.txt, Internet-Drafts
• Re: RFC 2460 issue, Markku Savela
• 3rd Call for Agenda Items, Brian Haberman
• Re: RFC 2460 issue, Fred Templin
• Router selection dead?, Suresh Krishnan
• RE: RFC 2460 issue, Suresh Krishnan
• RE: RFC 2460 issue, Dimitry Haskin
• Re: RFC 2460 issue, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Tim Chown
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Christian Huitema
• Re: draft-hain-templin-ipv6-localcomm-03.txt, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Jari Arkko
• comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-00.txt, Juergen Schoenwaelder
• I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-06.txt, Internet-Drafts
• RE: RFC 2460 issue, john . loughney
• Re: RFC 2460 issue, Jari Arkko
• Re: RFC 2460 issue, Suresh Krishnan
• v6ops-v6onbydefault: link-locals and AI_ADDRCONFIG, Pekka Savola
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, matthew . ford
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Mark Smith
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Erik Nordmark
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Erik Nordmark
• Re: draft-hain-templin-ipv6-localcomm-03.txt, Erik Nordmark
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michel Py
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Erik Nordmark
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Tony Hain
• NDproxy issues and draft update, Dave Thaler
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Oct 27 2003
• Re: draft-hain-templin-ipv6-localcomm-03.txt, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: rfc2462bis-00, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
• Re: rfc2462bis-00, Zefram
• rfc2462bis-00, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
• Re: draft-templin-tunnelmtu-01.txt, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Pekka Savola
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, Vijay Devarapalli
• discussion on v6ops-v6onbydefault and v6ops-onlinkassumption, Pekka Savola
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Pekka Savola
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Soliman Hesham
• Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 update: L=0 and A=1, JinHyeock Choi
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Erik Nordmark
• Re: draft-hain-templin-ipv6-localcomm-03.txt, Erik Nordmark
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, Erik Nordmark
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Erik Nordmark
• RE: draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt, O.L.N.Rao
• Re: Review: draft-ietf-v6ops-onlinkassumption-00.txt, Erik Nordmark
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-bykim-ipv6-hpd-00.txt, Byung-Yeob Kim
• RE: Review: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6onbydefault-00.txt, Chirayu Patel
• Oct 26 2003
• Re: Updated Node Requirements doc available, Pekka Savola
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Brian E Carpenter
• Updated Node Requirements doc available, john . loughney
• Weekly posting summary for ipv6 at ietf.org, Rob Austein
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, Francis Dupont
• Oct 25 2003
• [no subject], Unknown
• Review: draft-ietf-v6ops-onlinkassumption-00.txt, Bound, Jim
• Review: draft-ietf-v6ops-v6onbydefault-00.txt, Bound, Jim
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: A list of issues for RFC2462 update, Bound, Jim
• RE: draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt, Bound, Jim
• draft-templin-tunnelmtu-01.txt, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Review Input: draft-jinchoi-ipv6-cra-00.txt, JinHyeock Choi
• Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 update, JinHyeock Choi
• Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 update, JinHyeock Choi
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Soliman Hesham
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Erik Nordmark
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Pekka Savola
• RE: draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt, Soohong Daniel Park
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Bound, Jim
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Oct 24 2003
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Review Input: draft-jinchoi-ipv6-cra-00.txt, Bound, Jim
• RFC 2460 issue, Alain Durand
• draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt, Bound, Jim
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, Brian Haberman
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, Vijay Devarapalli
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Hans Kruse
• draft-hain-templin-ipv6-localcomm-03.txt, Fred Templin
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-main-ipaddr-text-rep-01.txt, Zefram
• RE: Review of draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt, john . loughney
• RE: Review of draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt, john . loughney
• Re: FW: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Pekka Savola
• Re: FW: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Jerome Durand
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Soliman Hesham
• FW: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", jspark
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Soliman Hesham
• RE: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Pekka Savola
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Pekka Savola
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Bound, Jim
• RE: RFC 2461-new issue?, Bound, Jim
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-bykim-ipv6-hpd-00.txt, Soohong Daniel Park
• RE: [Mip6] Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 update, Soohong Daniel Park
• RE: RFC 2461-new issue?, Soliman Hesham
• RE: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Soohong Daniel Park
• RE: A list of issues for RFC2462 update, Soliman Hesham
• RE: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", jspark
• Re: A list of issues for RFC2462 update, Vijay Devarapalli
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Ralph Droms
• RE: A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6 host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, Jeroen Massar
• Re: A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, Fred Templin
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
• Oct 23 2003
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Brian McGehee
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, Vijay Devarapalli
• RFC 2461-new issue?, Suresh Krishnan
• Re: A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6 host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6 host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, Juan Rodriguez Hervella
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Fred Templin
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-bykim-ipv6-hpd-00.txt, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• I-D ACTION:draft-bykim-ipv6-hpd-00.txt, Internet-Drafts
• RE: RFC 2461- issue list, Soliman Hesham
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Pekka Savola
• New Mobile Technologies Forum, Peter Lewis
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Erik Nordmark
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Ralph Droms
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Pekka Savola
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Pekka Savola
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Tim Chown
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Ronald van der Pol
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Jaehoon Jeong
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Erik Nordmark
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Alain Durand
• Re: RFC 2461- issue list, Erik Nordmark
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Geoff Huston
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Pekka Savola
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Tim Chown
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Soohong Daniel Park
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• Re: "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino
• "RFC 2461bis" issue: MTU handling, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Soohong Daniel Park
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Soohong Daniel Park
• RE: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Soliman Hesham
• "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Pekka Savola
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.tGoxt, Bound, Jim
• RFC 2461- issue list, Soliman Hesham
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Myung-Ki Shin
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Myung-Ki Shin
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Soliman Hesham
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Soliman Hesham
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Fred Templin
• Oct 22 2003
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Soohong Daniel Park
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Barany, Pete
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Fred Templin
• I-D ACTION:draft-soliman-ipv6-2461-bis-00.txt, Internet-Drafts
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Keith Moore
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Deprecating Site Local Addresses", Erik Nordmark
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Deprecating Site Local Addresses", Erik Nordmark
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Iljitsch van Beijnum
• New IMSS WG; IPv6 over Fibre Channel Draft, elizabeth . rodriguez
• Re: A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6 host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, Tim Chown
• Re: A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6 host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Erik Nordmark
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Pekka Savola
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Pekka Savola
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Zefram
• RE: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Erik Nordmark
• IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Deprecating Site Local Addresses", Brian Haberman
• RE: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", jspark
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Brian Haberman
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Brian Haberman
• IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", Brian Haberman
• IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture", Brian Haberman
• IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Brian Haberman
• IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Brian Haberman
• Re: A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6 host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, Tim Chown
• A host who has private IPv4 address can communicate with IPv6 host globaly by 6to4 tunnel, Jisuek.Lim
• Re: IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Erik Nordmark
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Christian Strauf (JOIN)
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Christian Strauf (JOIN)
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
• Oct 21 2003
• IPv6 w.g. Last Call on "Link Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses", Bob Hinden
• Request to Advance "MIB for the Transmission Control Protocol", Bob Hinden
• I-D ACTION:draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt, Internet-Drafts
• I-D ACTION:draft-jinchoi-ipv6-cra-00.txt, Internet-Drafts
• dubious premises: batch reply to "IPv6 adoption behavior", Keith Moore
• RE: Comments: draft-savola-v6ops-transarch-01.txt, Bound, Jim
• Discussion on "IPv6 adoption behavior", Bob Hinden
• Comments: draft-savola-v6ops-transarch-01.txt, Bound, Jim
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Bound, Jim
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Suresh Krishnan
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Michel Py
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Tim Chown
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Stig Venaas
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Suresh Krishnan
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Michel Py
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Tim Chown
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Jeroen Massar
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Ralph Droms
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Suresh Krishnan
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Suresh Krishnan
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Jeroen Massar
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Jeroen Massar
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Benny Amorsen
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Todd T. Fries
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Benny Amorsen
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-thaler-inet-tunnel-mib-00.txt, Pekka Savola
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Måns Nilsson
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Michel Py
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Michel Py
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Eugene M. Kim
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Christian Huitema
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Michel Py
• Oct 20 2003
• Re: Response to IESG comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-flow-label-07.txt, Bob Hinden
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• [no subject], Unknown
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Eugene M. Kim
• Link Local address : Basic question, Guru Yeleswarapu
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, EricLKlein
• Re: Raise the bar for v6?, Ronald van der Pol
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Jeroen Massar
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Bound, Jim
• Oct 18 2003
• Weekly posting summary for ipv6 at ietf.org, Rob Austein
• Oct 18 2003
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Oct 17 2003
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-00.txt, Sellers, Julian P
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Question on RFC 2473 about Tunnel Encapsulation Limit, Srinivasan Narasimhan
• A list of issues for RFC2462 update, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-00.txt, Bob Hinden
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-00.txt, Suresh Krishnan
• Comments on RA issues for MD, JinHyeock Choi
• Oct 16 2003
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Tony Hain
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Geoff Huston
• RFC2461 update, Soliman Hesham
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Brian E Carpenter
• RFC2462 update, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Re: Unicast and multicast site-local addresses, Andrew White
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Christian Strauf (JOIN)
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Tony Hain
• FW: I-D ACTION:draft-thaler-inet-tunnel-mib-00.txt, Dave Thaler
• Oct 15 2003
• Re: Unicast and multicast site-local addresses, Brian Haberman
• Unicast and multicast site-local addresses, Barany, Pete
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Mohsen Souissi
• Re: stealth v6 DNS, Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Brian Haberman
• RE: stealth v6 DNS, Jeroen Massar
• RE: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Jeroen Massar
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Bound, Jim
• RE: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Bound, Jim
• RE: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, John Gregson
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Mohsen Souissi
• Re: stealth v6 DNS, Bill Manning
• RE: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Soohong Daniel Park
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Måns Nilsson
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Pekka Savola
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Måns Nilsson
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Jeroen Massar
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• [Announce] RA issues for MD/ DNA I-D, JinHyeock Choi
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Michel Py
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Christian Strauf (JOIN)
• just test... please ignore this, Youn-Hee Han
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Oct 14 2003
• Test ... please ignore, Barany, Peter
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Keith Moore
• Re: Removing features, Leif Johansson
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Dan Lanciani
• Re: Removing features, Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Re: IPv6 adoption behavior, Geoff Huston
• RE: IPv6 adoption behavior, Michel Py
• IPv6 adoption behavior, Fred Baker
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Carlos Friacas
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Fred Baker
• RE: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Michel Py
• Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Mans Nilsson
• RE: Response to IESG comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-flow-label-07.txt, Soliman Hesham
• Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ?, Mark Smith
• Response to IESG comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-flow-label-07.txt, Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Raise the bar for v6?, Bill Manning
• Raise the bar for v6?, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Removing features, Juan Rodriguez Hervella
• RE: Removing features, Jeroen Massar
• Re: Removing features, Juan Rodriguez Hervella
• RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Bound, Jim
• Oct 13 2003
• I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-deprecate-site-local-01.txt, Internet-Drafts
• Re: Removing features, Mans Nilsson
• Re: Removing features, Mans Nilsson
• RE: Removing features, Jeroen Massar
• Re: Removing features, Juan Rodriguez Hervella
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Brian E Carpenter
• Re: Removing features, Brian E Carpenter
• Oct 11 2003
• Weekly posting summary for ipv6 at ietf.org, Rob Austein
• Oct 11 2003
• Re: Removing features, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: Removing features, Michel Py
• Re: Removing features, Leif Johansson
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Leif Johansson
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Leif Johansson
• Re: Removing features, Rob Austein
• Oct 10 2003
• Re: Removing features, Valdis . Kletnieks
• RE: Removing features, Fred Baker
• Re: Removing features, Keith Moore
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Fred Baker
• RE: Removing features, Margaret . Wasserman
• Re: Removing features, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: Removing features, Fred Baker
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Keith Moore
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Eliot Lear
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Stephen Sprunk
• Re: Removing features, Valdis . Kletnieks
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Keith Moore
• Re: Removing features, Keith Moore
• I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-00.txt, Internet-Drafts
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Leif Johansson
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Scott Bradner
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Eugene M. Kim
• RE: Removing features, Margaret . Wasserman
• Removing features, Fred Baker
• RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Tony Hain
• RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Tony Hain
• Re: state-of-art SLs, Unknown
• re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Scott Bradner
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Spencer Dawkins
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Thomas Narten
• RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Margaret . Wasserman
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Keith Moore
• Updated text for Node Req: Issue23: DNS issues, john . loughney
• An official HIP BOF request has been sent, Pekka Nikander
• RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Michel Py
• RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Christian Huitema
• RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Michel Py
• Re: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Harald Tveit Alvestrand
• test, Mukesh . Gupta
• Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue, Tony Hain
• Oct 09 2003
• Re: What is the current status of geographic location in the IPv6 address?, Iljitsch van Beijnum
• RE: What is the current status of geographic location in the IPv6 address?, Bob Hinden
• RE: What is the current status of geographic location in the IPv6 address?, Michel Py
• Re: What is the current status of geographic location in the IPv6 address?, Bill Manning
• Fwd: RE: Review of draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt, Chirayu Patel
• RE: Review of draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt, john . loughney
• unsubscribe, Srinivasa Rao Nalluri
• unsubscribe, VO Tien Cuong FTRD/DAC/ISS
• Re: Appel due to management of the "site-local issue", Leif Johansson
• Oct 08 2003
• RE: What is the current status of geographic location in the IPv6 address?, Michel Py
• Re: What is the current status of geographic location in the IPv6 address?, Brian Haberman
• What is the current status of geographic location in the IPv6 address?, EricLKlein
• 2nd Call for Agenda Items, Brian Haberman
• Re: comments on address selection API, Samita Chakrabarti
• Re: comments on address selection API, Samita Chakrabarti
• Oct 07 2003
• Reminder: Internet-Draft cutoff dates for Minneapolis IETF, Bob Hinden
• Re: Appel due to management of the "site-local issue", Margaret . Wasserman
• Oct 04 2003
• Weekly posting summary for ipv6 at ietf.org, Rob Austein
• Oct 03 2003
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Fred Templin
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Dan Lanciani
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Fred Templin
• Oct 01 2003
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Brian E Carpenter
• RE: Node Req: Issue22: 4.5.4 Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC3484 text, john . loughney
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Brian Haberman
• ndproxy-00 (new text + reorganization), Chirayu Patel
• ndproxy-00 (new text + reorganization), Chirayu Patel
• ndproxy-00 (General comments), Chirayu Patel
• RE: Node Req: Issue26: 9.1.1 IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC2711, john . loughney
• RE: Node Req: Issue27: 11. Security Considerations, john . loughney
• [no subject], Unknown
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Andrew White
• Sep 30 2003
• Re: help, Mark . Andrews
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Fred Templin
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Fred Templin
• Response to appeal by Tony Hain on site-local issue, The IESG
• help, Abdul-Hafeez Jamali
• Agenda Requests for Minneapolis, Brian Haberman
• Re: Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Ralph Droms
• Comments on draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-02.txt, Brian Haberman
• Test Mesg. Pls Ignore, Robert Honore
• Re: Node Req: Issue27: 11. Security Considerations, Brian Haberman
• Re: Node Req: Issue27: 11. Security Considerations, Thomas Narten
• RE: Node Req: Issue27: 11. Security Considerations, john . loughney
• RE: Node Req: Issue26: 9.1.1 IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC2711, john . loughney
• Sep 29 2003
• Re: Node Req: Issue27: 11. Security Considerations, Thomas Narten
• Re: Node Req: Issue26: 9.1.1 IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC2711, Brian Haberman
• Re: Node Req: Issue26: 9.1.1 IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC2711, Thomas Narten
• RE: Node Req: Issue23: DNS issues, john . loughney
• Re: Node Req: Issue23: DNS issues, Thomas Narten
• Re: Node Req: Issue22: 4.5.4 Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC3484 text, Thomas Narten
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Måns Nilsson
• Re: [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-01.txt], Steven Blake
• Re: [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-01.txt], Brian E Carpenter
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michel Py
• Sep 28 2003
• Re: why market picked up NATs, Antonio Querubin
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Måns Nilsson
• Re: comments on deprecate-site-local-00, Måns Nilsson
• Re: comments on deprecate-site-local-00, Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Re: why market picked up NATs, Lutz Pressler
• Weekly posting summary for ipv6 at ietf.org, Rob Austein
• Sep 26 2003
• RE: Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, Soohong Daniel Park
• IPv6 to IPv4 translator, Ron Lee
• Sep 26 2003
• Re: why market picked up NATs, Antonio Querubin
• Re: [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-01.txt], Zefram
• Re: Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, Fred Templin
• Re: Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, James Kempf
• Re: [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-01.txt], Steven Blake
• Re: Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, Brian Haberman
• Re: Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, Brian Haberman
• RE: Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, Soliman Hesham
• Re: Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, Pekka Savola
• Sep 25 2003
• [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-01.txt], Bob Hinden
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Bob Hinden
• Re: Prefix Delegation and Cascading [was why market picked up NATs], Pekka Savola
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Mark Smith
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michel Py
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michel Py
• Sep 24 2003
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Bob Hinden
• Prefix Delegation and Cascading [was why market picked up NATs], Bob Hinden
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Fred Templin
• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt, Jari Arkko
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Erik Nordmark
• Fwd: Last Call: 'Multicast Listener Discovery Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6' to Proposed Standard, Bob Hinden
• RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt, john . loughney
• Re: why market picked up NATs, Andrew White
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Eliot Lear
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michel Py
• I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipv6-unique-local-addr-01.txt, Internet-Drafts
• Updating the Node Requirements document, john . loughney
• Node Req: Issue27: 11. Security Considerations, john . loughney
• Node Req: Issue26: 9.1.1 IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC2711, john . loughney
• Node Req: Issue25: 6.1 Transition Mechanisms, john . loughney
• Node Req: Issue24: 5.3 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) - RFC3315, john . loughney
• Node Req: Issue23: DNS issues, john . loughney
• Node Req: Issue22: 4.5.4 Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC3484 text, john . loughney
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Thomas Narten
• Issue21: Section 4.2: Prefix discovery & DAD, john . loughney
• Issue20: Sect. 4.2 disabling Router Discovery, john . loughney
• Issue 19: AD review of draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt, john . loughney
• Re: Note on id/loc separation discussion, Brian Haberman
• RE: Node requirement nits (was: AD review of draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt), john . loughney
• Re: comments on deprecate-site-local-00, Tim Chown
• RE: Mobility text in node reqts (Was: AD review of draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-05.txt), john . loughney
• Re: comments on deprecate-site-local-00, Brian E Carpenter
• Re: What end-point identifiers are needed for?, Pekka Nikander
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Mark Smith
• RE: Note on id/loc separation discussion, Michel Py
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Pekka Savola
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Ralph Droms
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Eliot Lear
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Ralph Droms
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Keith Moore
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Eliot Lear
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Keith Moore
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Benny Amorsen
• Sep 23 2003
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Keith Moore
• Re: comments on deprecate-site-local-00, Margaret Wasserman
• Updates to Neighbor Discovery and Stateless Autoconfiguration, Brian Haberman
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Mark Smith
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michael Thomas
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Write-ups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michel Py
• Re: Note on id/loc separation discussion, Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Note on id/loc separation discussion, Brian Haberman
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Keith Moore
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Christian de Larrinaga
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Write-ups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Re: comments on deprecate-site-local-00, Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Kurt Erik Lindqvist
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Write-ups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Iljitsch van Beijnum
• Re: comments on deprecate-site-local-00, Pekka Savola
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Write-ups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Michel Py
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Amoakoh Gyasi-Agyei
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Keith Moore
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Mark Smith
• RE: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Ron Lee
• Re: why market picked up NATs [Re: Writeups on why RFC1918 is bad?], Keith Moore