RE: Requirements for Limited-Scope Unicast Addressing in IPv6

["Michel Py" <michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill,

> Bill Manning wrote:
> what an odd point of view.  if, as is asserted, the
> IPv6 is "production" then why are we still seeing
> drafts changing the address format?

You are making my point. I am not the one that states that v6 is
operational, BTW.
http://ops.ietf.org/lists/v6ops/v6ops.2002/msg00000.html

Michel.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------