IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Comments on current MPvD draft.

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Wed, 15 November 2017 11:00 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8EAB126CC7 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 03:00:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 X6NAVOsZ5Cqp for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 03:00:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFF67129409 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 03:00:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 8C4FAAF; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:00:46 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1510743646; bh=2FpmktokXX3TfyWfkcB+uUw5EFJOtR6VVXDkYh65r8I=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=AYnn0MkHGE4MDji3aS+pk1RWTldWW3cyuxTgvINTJflQZmkoA94s2z/kV3FvBBOBQ YNuFrYxTwGKc1N8MTql5zqnR1UtNytfYwpWjuNNtKaqyWEcMI1zGCVAI9PGbiItAlp dI5MgP+8N8smyE9jLupjK7oTa/HBkfFb5QSS4CTQ=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89D1D9F; Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:00:46 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:00:46 +0100
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
cc: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <45957315-A9A2-4E11-9069-5C41C7397034@fugue.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711151159480.32099@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <45957315-A9A2-4E11-9069-5C41C7397034@fugue.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/OiPe-q8qLqiAbVMgtyv2ojvIQYk>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Comments on current MPvD draft.
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 11:00:54 -0000

On Wed, 15 Nov 2017, Ted Lemon wrote:

> The assumption that each PvD will have its own router

I don't think this is the case? It's just that each PVD is in its own RA, 
it doesn't mean one router can't send multiple RAs, one per PVD? That's at 
least my understanding.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email