[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Link Adaptation for IPv6-in-IPv4 Tunnels
- To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
- Subject: Re: Link Adaptation for IPv6-in-IPv4 Tunnels
- From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:24:09 -0700
- Authentication-results: imail.cisco.com; header.From=fred@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( message from cisco.com verified; );
- Cc: <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
- Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=645; t=1127493372; x=1127925572; c=nowsp; s=nebraska; h=Subject:From:Date:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; d=cisco.com; i=fred@cisco.com; z=Subject:Re=3A=20Link=20Adaptation=20for=20IPv6-in-IPv4=20Tunnels=20| From:Fred=20Baker=20<fred@cisco.com>| Date:Fri,=2023=20Sep=202005=2009=3A24=3A09=20-0700| Content-Type:text/plain=3B=20charset=3DUS-ASCII=3B=20delsp=3Dyes=3B=20format=3Dflowed| Content-Transfer-Encoding:7bit; b=MyU7JA35XthJnChJWEx2ytm9RJ+AraT7kG6Xf0SWMYOhGWOG49x9NHxhAdemDxoogy+LX7Hq junJdJefsaruVw6sWeEegoULQhAjMVBKjYphT8+zgQG/fQ4WC10sitexpm7eToP47IdfJ5Za6Ml 8+KrFn+9h9HsJqI1IuUx4wXc=
- In-reply-to: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A10D5049@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
- References: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A10D5049@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Does it still propose a protocol or protocol change?
I don't know offhand whether the charter of v6ops then precluded
protocol work, and won't go into whether it was proper for [MECH] to
be done in v6ops. Given the present charter, I can treat it as a
requirements document that may be asking for something like the work
you are proposing. But my read of the document you pointed to is that
it is still proposing an incompatible change (as in "unchanged
equipment will not perform the function and once the message is
segmented in this fashion it must be reassembled in this fashion.
I think that has to be done in a WG chartered to do non-backward-
compatible changes to IPv4.
On Sep 23, 2005, at 9:04 AM, Templin, Fred L wrote:
Can this work be contributed as an extension to [MECH]?