Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt).
Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Thu, 22 December 2016 11:01 UTC
Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08E941294D0
for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:01:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
header.d=nic.cz
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id EYIM98bRktAj for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:01:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE0C61294AC
for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:01:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:2dff:d8c3:f897:773] (unknown
[IPv6:2001:718:1a02:1:2dff:d8c3:f897:773])
by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3D65060BF2;
Thu, 22 Dec 2016 12:01:17 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default;
t=1482404477; bh=t1S++Bh3wGsDXidNL2gas4v/n8WFP74Y9vuGVwU3sCc=;
h=From:Date:To;
b=oajyChn242DdvDjfCGlBYsMVeN/la2JKEJLsMab1Mo9qkLfjObhldE7TmXGSVnXDf
fDs2kMXWBrR0NCSj0WRYVOyyjzPeQ0UAij5hSHm6ivgbIM2MZPO3BWwSDHtgvfnHed
Mfu1/0+VsXH8ycmJuRGgy8DDhsrzmg3/FMHK0Xwo=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt).
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR04MB14492A6FA01B592B6DD69093BD920@HE1PR04MB1449.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 12:01:16 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7F96C4EC-B762-4A2C-AF7E-20D92AE7F9CF@nic.cz>
References: <HE1PR04MB14492A6FA01B592B6DD69093BD920@HE1PR04MB1449.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/xIm0l6b24OGljNzZsKzLhGFGxMU>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>,
<mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
<mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 11:01:20 -0000
Dear Khaled, if you are a new implementation of the Turing Test, then pass my deepest compliments to your author. Otherwise, PLEASE STOP sending this to the ietf@ietf.org mailing list. Thanks, Lada > On 22 Dec 2016, at 11:29, Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi All, > > Easy next step, some RFCs should be obsoleted and some others should be updated. > > For example, these RFCs should be obsoleted: > > RFC 1853. > RFC 2766. > RFC 6146. > RFC 6144. > . > . > > These RFCs should be updated: > > RFC 2460. > . > . > . > > Looking for a private discussion regarding IPv10 future topics. > > Best regards, > > Khaled Omar > > > From: Khaled Omar > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 10:24 PM > To: 'ietf@ietf.org' > Subject: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt). > > Hi IETF members, > > I would like to inform you that the IPv10 Internet draft has been successfully uploaded. > > Here is the link for the IPv10 Internet draft https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt > > All participants for the IPv10 discussion regardless if there will be addition or modification will be highly appreciated. > > Thanks for your time. > > Best Regards, > > Khaled Omar -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
- IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt… Khaled Omar
- RE: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Khaled Omar
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Leonir Hoxha
- RE: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Tony Hain
- Re IPv6 adoption (Was Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix… Steve Crocker
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Randy Bush
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… shogunx
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… David Conrad
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Randy Bush
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… shogunx
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Patrik Fältström
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… John C Klensin
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Patrik Fältström
- The demand for IPv4 addresses (was: IPv10) S Moonesamy
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… S Moonesamy
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Lee Howard
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… John C Klensin
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 John Levine
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 John Levine
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 (fwd) John R Levine
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 (fwd) Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 Mark Andrews
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 John R Levine
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 (fwd) Mark Andrews
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 Mark Andrews
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Mark Andrews
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 John R Levine
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Mark Andrews
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Randy Bush
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Randy Bush
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 John Levine
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Mark Andrews
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- RE: multihoming, was IPv10 Michel Py
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 John C Klensin
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 John R Levine
- Re: IPv6, was IPv10 shogunx
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Patrik Fältström
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Randy Bush
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… heasley
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Patrik Fältström
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Masataka Ohta
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Randy Bush
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Octavio Alvarez
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Stewart Bryant
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Masataka Ohta
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… David Farmer
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Jeff Tantsura
- Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10 John Levine
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Masataka Ohta
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Randy Bush
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00… Randy Bush
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10 Randy Bush
- Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10 Randy Bush
- Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10 Randy Bush