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

Re: "Link Adaptation for IPv6-in-IPv4 Tunnels" as WG item?

yup, it's a protocol.

We're not chartered to do protocols; in fact, our charter specifically says we are NOT to do protocols. I'm going to have to ask you to take it elsewhere. I'd suggest a discussion with the AD as to where he would recommend it go.

On Aug 26, 2005, at 2:57 PM, Templin, Fred L wrote:

 instead of (re)using the IPv4 header
bits as currently specified, a small (8 bytes or less) L2.5
header that sits above the IPv4 header could be defined with:

  - a segment ID field (i.e., instead of using the
    fragment offset bits as in the current draft)
  - a "more fragments" bit
  - flow identifier fields
  - a next header field
  - etc.