Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06]
Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk> Tue, 17 January 2017 14:58 UTC
Return-Path: <tim.chown@jisc.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56100129470 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:58:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.09
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=jisc365.onmicrosoft.com
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 zpF3gphkSJbW for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:58:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eu-smtp-delivery-189.mimecast.com (eu-smtp-delivery-189.mimecast.com [207.82.80.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0134512942F for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 06:58:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jisc365.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-jisc-ac-uk; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=x3PfUSewppc/5sQ2IegEiJT8T/7jJegt2i1I6BcAqb4=; b=Q2r3fwrC5FENGafHgABS6f0VVf+srdjfxERhmRQEqjehbyRiNu4gK8L99maFXdrnRcR9iaLgz8d8PTqwHqAvxyvGWBd9wVmr74v2DqgQyoEqQHgY7J223TgLefh01OKMIqMQr8ZXT7iS2wDo+MfQXbMLexWpzhlrpi9zajItTdI=
Received: from EUR01-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-ve1eur01lp0247.outbound.protection.outlook.com [213.199.154.247]) (Using TLS) by eu-smtp-1.mimecast.com with ESMTP id uk-mta-26-K4SXe8myMu-WM9QK8gItyA-1; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:57:55 +0000
Received: from AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.163.188.14) by AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.163.188.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.860.6; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:57:54 +0000
Received: from AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5989:a034:d099:8480]) by AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5989:a034:d099:8480%15]) with mapi id 15.01.0860.008; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:57:54 +0000
From: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown@jisc.ac.uk>
To: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
Subject: Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06]
Thread-Topic: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06]
Thread-Index: AQHSbp9kHWr9YQvRhEWArHxhZZH6KaE62uEAgACtgoCAAFbFAIAAE6IAgAAFGACAACBcgIAABWoAgAAME4CAAEougIAASzmAgAAHx4A=
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:57:54 +0000
Message-ID: <7024EF45-953E-4C5B-9069-8B61B7AADCD1@jisc.ac.uk>
References: <148406593094.22166.2894840062954191477.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <m2fukqbbwv.wl-randy@psg.com> <F6953234-3F85-4E28-9861-433ADD01A490@gmail.com> <m2wpdzhncn.wl-randy@psg.com> <82245ef2-cd34-9bd6-c04e-f262e285f983@gmail.com> <m2d1frhjfn.wl-randy@psg.com> <18e6e13c-e605-48ff-4906-2d5531624d64@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1cvZ8Y3+bHeML=Xwqr+YgDspZGnZi=jqQj4qe2kMc4zw@mail.gmail.com> <m2lguffnco.wl-randy@psg.com> <CAKD1Yr1TrTiPRdyutobmb_77XJ7guNzLrg=H_p7qi4BfQ8V=GA@mail.gmail.com> <m2d1frfm6m.wl-randy@psg.com> <CAKD1Yr2Njjd8_Mr+6TRFF6C5pdcX4yFgpFVyEkykDuytu2B8mg@mail.gmail.com> <2A5073777007277764473D78@PSB> <4596c3d4-a337-f08e-7909-f14270b7085f@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau06R3iYRpYLADhvHox4C9qdsJCuxFsJapRhOQcWT4qk_g@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2weZcoHiBzN94QAQ9WGhWR16PmMMFNg=5YLmr_dhPjjpA@mail.gmail.com> <fcf580ec-3617-ca5f-5337-37acb6e928ba@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr25zNeQGvNJa=WzCjKMd9LaYrSwG=o4tUWn1Zc2ASZjrA@mail.gmail.com> <93700502-5d49-86ce-11b0-ab9904423961@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3wyza0_enWErMhmKKkA1ZOXPv5GG8dMT8HUQZsB5--UQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxppi5g_S05-m+B2jKMYePapPM0_wMA4XioYgwipwbKVHQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAedzxoY6MGyvzDvUcZ44ka=5RcGwQ16fzRp29445Pa7mQYNHA@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau36r2UgXPfdcdEAJ914QqvVvjGJK+=mgE9Y2tpBiDSRig@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3RpUaNKkyTPHPWWew80cyGkiT1p7vYwfejESP4tQw31A@mail.gmail.com> <CAN-Dau0OsD4RcVUN+me98g6SJ=oaAr4HoqGtP88PTbMU_-kuGQ@mail.gmail.com> <00D1565E-7119-4C52-AF06-95E3F4C5905A@employees.org> <CAN-Dau0Fkb-M8VM9iL9xwy89bir5PhNHJ3D1VFrnNppVXNyeOg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAN-Dau0Fkb-M8VM9iL9xwy89bir5PhNHJ3D1VFrnNppVXNyeOg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [194.82.140.195]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: cc25a759-dd43-4959-c952-08d43ee93764
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(22001);SRVR:AM3PR07MB1140;
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; AM3PR07MB1140; 7:QIzyrp+ACEn/2dk2zl9renbAAKHTBPjQqIJAfWRZaM63mzPNwnwgkSWhsRNYHLVhYYVEy1sY3PsxDlpaovD+Q9o68CY6fvwgiu+8bgONcVPy/mU2c/JM5nPwwAWkdx36lqEjNvaiM32mk+dVmAfAo+FxLBUeW7vx/PRTkYL0oMPjsDqzgxl/cSbCzFcbc48RY2dLM3k3UYJ4cYT/zFMN9F48HJiV3Zc/UeT0jlMg94Pu7zwXFz9d40gJHQY0as1kl5Qtqmu5xu6ZHvcQ+prWqJUYVJ/lB5jrW2iSyCdM83548wWxjdrEDjFQCAX1J6zXumM4mHT/Ft54KNpuKaPkP6xt8MfaWS7oIuAVp1zA0ciO7oqmsOeUYCxgMJkPPEbo/owVpq3S63qh5j/ec5bZkOt2yw0lE8WoxDGYUNVwovrIzH/Jb3ejoiS+ivmLm1YPSYuVBfU6DKMwpwbCzu/CrQ==; 20:cREVtqZCIzImAEk834KZ0tBCeUvGikKmwTgL5UizErZusyBS5tpr0vLb+ekfI76HXzbicM3lwVX67EN2l5QK0epT5WU4a3XmlDizJgv0XMyXatzwu7nITNjM3ceN6Arp0erM3jAFl5UJSeJ7ri8v3soFdU1Vkxo3u9tkjioFjWY=
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM3PR07MB1140F86AFB4DA1A18C7F0EE3D67C0@AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(20558992708506)(8104003914727);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(6041248)(20161123555025)(20161123560025)(20161123564025)(20161123562025)(6072148); SRVR:AM3PR07MB1140; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM3PR07MB1140;
x-forefront-prvs: 01901B3451
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(7916002)(39450400003)(189002)(377454003)(199003)(24454002)(86362001)(8936002)(8676002)(83716003)(81166006)(74482002)(81156014)(68736007)(6306002)(99286003)(54896002)(54906002)(2171001)(3280700002)(50226002)(33656002)(2906002)(6436002)(6506006)(2900100001)(6116002)(6486002)(229853002)(3846002)(102836003)(4326007)(38730400001)(36756003)(5250100002)(106356001)(106116001)(230783001)(92566002)(5660300001)(82746002)(7736002)(105586002)(93886004)(189998001)(66066001)(76176999)(110136003)(6916009)(50986999)(236005)(3660700001)(101416001)(42882006)(6512007)(97736004)(30001)(57306001)(2950100002)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AM3PR07MB1140; H:AM3PR07MB1140.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: jisc.ac.uk
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 Jan 2017 14:57:54.2642 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 48f9394d-8a14-4d27-82a6-f35f12361205
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM3PR07MB1140
X-MC-Unique: K4SXe8myMu-WM9QK8gItyA-1
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7024EF45953E4C5B90698B61B7AADCD1jiscacuk_"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/c0f_9xO3tOKtpJkcn7aHPAOSzOM>
Cc: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:58:05 -0000
Hi, On 17 Jan 2017, at 14:30, David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu<mailto:farmer@umn.edu>> wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 4:00 AM, <otroan@employees.org<mailto:otroan@employees.org>> wrote: > What breaks if all IIDs in global unicast are not 64 bits? Especially other than SLACC? I would hope such a REQUIREMENT has a better motivation that "we said so". Citing the "rest of the specifications" was simply my shorthand for I don't see what else breaks. RFC7421, section 4.2. There's also a set of political considerations, where one tries to achieve balance between the provider's desire to have effective aggregation and the end-users desire to have enough address space. We specifically want to avoid provider's charging by the address. O. Exactly, and to me RFC7421 say to me "IIDs SHOULD be 64 bits," but it does not say to me "IIDs MUST be 64 bits", this is a subtle but important difference. Furthermore, RFC7421, section 4.3.2, also say there is operational use of IID other than 64 bits, which to me disproves the statement "IIDs MUST be 64 bits" and shifts things to "IIDs SHOULD be 64 bits.” Well, when we wrote that document, the aim was to highlight the problems you may encounter if you did go off piste in terms of IID length. It’s just an informational document, so those “SHOULDs” are purely implicit. Section 4.3.2 is purely noting comments made on the 6man list during discussion of the Why /64 draft about some rather rare deployments in the wild. We specifically asked, iirc, about known non /64 host-based subnetting, and this section reports on the responses. So lets be clear, I'm not saying that we should RECOMMEND other than 64 bit IIDs, I'm simply differentiating between section 1 and section 3 of RFC 2119. So, I'm asking what breaks if we change from "IIDs MUST be 64 bits" to the in my opinion the more proper "IIDs SHOULD be 64 bits". So, I would prefer: ... For all currently allocated unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary value 000, that length should be 64 bits. But, I'm willing to live with what Brian proposed: ... For all currently allocated unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary value 000, that length is 64 bits. This seems fine. Tim But, I can not accept what Eric proposed: ... For all currently allocated unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary value 000, that length is required to be 64 bits. Thanks. -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:Email%3Afarmer@umn.edu> Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 =============================================== -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
- Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian Haberman
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Bob Hinden
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Punana Lebo
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian Haberman
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Bob Hinden
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Bob Hinden
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Bob Hinden
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 David Farmer
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 heasley
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Suresh Krishnan
- AW: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Karsten Thomann
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 sthaug
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: AW: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Fernando Gont
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Fernando Gont
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 heasley
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Mark Smith
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Fernando Gont
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 John C Klensin
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 David Farmer
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Mark Smith
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Brian E Carpenter
- IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf-6ma… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Mark Smith
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Erik Kline
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Randy Bush
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Fernando Gont
- Re: IID length text Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Fernando Gont
- Re: IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: IID length text Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Erik Kline
- Re: IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Erik Kline
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… David Farmer
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… David Farmer
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… David Farmer
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… otroan
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… David Farmer
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Tim Chown
- Re: IID length text Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Fred Baker
- Re: IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: IID length text Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… otroan
- Unclear text [was IID length text [was Re: Review… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Brian E Carpenter
- RE: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Manfredi, Albert E
- Re: IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: Unclear text [was IID length text [was Re: Re… Fernando Gont
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Fernando Gont
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Timothy Winters
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… otroan
- Re: Unclear text [was IID length text [was Re: Re… otroan
- Re: IID length text Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… David Farmer
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… james woodyatt
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… 神明達哉
- Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- RE: Updated IID length text Manfredi, Albert E
- RE: Updated IID length text Manfredi, Albert E
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- RE: Updated IID length text Manfredi, Albert E
- RE: Updated IID length text Manfredi, Albert E
- Re: Updated IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: Updated IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: Updated IID length text Fernando Gont
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Sander Steffann
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- RE: Updated IID length text Manfredi, Albert E
- RE: Updated IID length text Manfredi, Albert E
- Re: Updated IID length text Alexandre Petrescu
- RE: Updated IID length text Templin, Fred L
- Re: Updated IID length text Mark Andrews
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… David Farmer
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text David Farmer
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-06 Suresh Krishnan
- Re: IID length text Suresh Krishnan
- Re: Updated IID length text Suresh Krishnan
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text David Farmer
- Re: Updated IID length text Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text David Farmer
- Re: Updated IID length text otroan
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… otroan
- Re: Updated IID length text otroan
- Re: Updated IID length text otroan
- RE: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Manfredi, Albert E
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text Bob Hinden
- Re: Updated IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text otroan
- Re: Updated IID length text otroan
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Tore Anderson
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: IID length text [was Re: Review of draft-ietf… Tore Anderson
- Re: IID length text sthaug
- Re: IID length text Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Updated IID length text Bob Hinden
- Re: Updated IID length text Suresh Krishnan