Changes between Version 8 and Version 9 of DhcpIetf


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Feb 10, 2012, 3:46:22 PM (6 years ago)
Author:
tomek
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • DhcpIetf

    v8 v9  
    66=== Route configuration over DHCPv6 ===
    77
    8 Route configuration over DHCPv6: [http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option/ draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option]. This proposal was adopted by MIF (Multiple Interfaces) working group in IETF. It went up to WGLC (workgroup last call) when it experienced a fierce opposition by small, but very vocal group. IETF makes decisions based on consensus and support or opposition is expressed on mailing lists. Currently it is not decided yet, if we are allowed to continue this work or not. It helps a lot if you can voice your support for this draft on MIF mailing list. You may want to review [http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif/current/msg01431.html this post] and following discussion. (Warning: it is 100+ posts long). It is very useful to explain your use case, how you are planning to use this feature. Simply voicing a support is also nice, but extending it with use case makes your voice stronger. It doesn't require much effort. A simple mail sent to mif@ietf.org will do (you may need to subscribe to be able to post, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif. You can unsubscribe immediately after posting, if youu are not interested in follow-up discussion.).
     8Route configuration over DHCPv6: [http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option/ draft-ietf-mif-dhcpv6-route-option]. This proposal was adopted by MIF (Multiple Interfaces) working group in IETF. It went up to WGLC (workgroup last call) when it experienced a fierce opposition by small, but very vocal group. IETF makes decisions based on consensus and support or opposition is expressed on mailing lists. Currently it is not decided yet, if we are allowed to continue this work or not. It helps a lot if you can voice your support for this draft on MIF mailing list. You may want to review [http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mif/current/msg01431.html this post] and following discussion. (Warning: it is 100+ posts long). It is very useful to explain your use case, how you are planning to use this feature. Simply voicing a support is also nice, but extending it with use case makes your voice stronger. It doesn't require much effort. A simple mail sent to mif @ ietf.org will do (you may need to subscribe to be able to post, see https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif. You can unsubscribe immediately after posting, if youu are not interested in follow-up discussion.).
    99
    1010=== High-Availability and DHCPv6 Failover ===