IP Version 6 Working Group Discussion Archive - Thread Index

• Re: WG Review: IP over IEEE 802.16 Networks (16ng), (continued)
  • Re: WG Review: IP over IEEE 802.16 Networks (16ng), timbeck04
• Fwd: IETF Meeting Survey, Bob Hinden
• RFC 4489 on A Method for Generating Link-Scoped IPv6 Multicast Addresses, rfc-editor
• RFC 4291: Questions about Anycast Addresses, COMBES Jean-Michel RD-MAPS-ISS
  • Re: RFC 4291: Questions about Anycast Addresses, Bob Hinden
  • Re: RFC 4291: Questions about Anycast Addresses, Francis Dupont
• is that inconsistent in RFC4291?, Lawrence Zou
  • Re: is that inconsistent in RFC4291?, Brian Haberman
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: is that inconsistent in RFC4291?, Gray, Eric
    • RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Soohong Daniel Park
      • Re: RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Roger Jorgensen
      • Re: RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Eliot Lear
      • Re: RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Roger Jorgensen
      • Re: RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Brian Haberman
      • Re: RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Bob Hinden
      • Re: RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Soohong Daniel Park
      • Re: RFC4193 - ULA universal/local bit = 1 or 0, Bob Hinden
• Consensus declared: M&O bits text for 2461bis, Brian Haberman
• missing minor error in draft-ietf-ipv6-privacy-addrs-v2-04, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉
  • Re: missing minor error in draft-ietf-ipv6-privacy-addrs-v2-04, Suresh Krishnan
• RE: RFC2461(bis), section 6.3.6, Soliman, Hesham
  • RE: RFC2461(bis), section 6.3.6, Templin, Fred L
    • Re: RFC2461(bis), section 6.3.6, Thomas Narten
      • RE: RFC2461(bis), section 6.3.6, Templin, Fred L
      • Re: RFC2461(bis), section 6.3.6, Thomas Narten