IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Expiration impending: <draft-thubert-6man-ipv6-over-wireless-06.txt>

Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com> Sun, 22 November 2020 11:29 UTC

Return-Path: <pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com>
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 B643F3A1455 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 03:29:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Hj_NarBBDBWg for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 03:29:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (stereo.hq.phicoh.net [130.37.15.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E9B13A1453 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 03:29:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stereo.hq.phicoh.net (localhost [::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by stereo.hq.phicoh.net with esmtp (TLS version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305) (Smail #157) id m1kgnYw-0000I5C; Sun, 22 Nov 2020 12:29:46 +0100
Message-Id: <m1kgnYw-0000I5C@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Cc: "Pascal Thubert \(pthubert\)" <pthubert=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Expiration impending: <draft-thubert-6man-ipv6-over-wireless-06.txt>
From: Philip Homburg <pch-ipv6-ietf-6@u-1.phicoh.com>
Sender: pch-b9D3CB0F5@u-1.phicoh.com
References: <160603202606.8188.11893701417034577472@ietfa.amsl.com> <7B0EBC9E-4831-4005-98D9-5010CD1097F6@cisco.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 22 Nov 2020 08:17:31 +0000 ." <7B0EBC9E-4831-4005-98D9-5010CD1097F6@cisco.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 12:29:46 +0100
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/r0f4UKsJKcML7MEwoaG94gWArz0>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 11:29:56 -0000

>    I do not have much to add to the individual submission. It is
>    up to the WG to take it from there or let it die. What do you
>    think ? Keep safe!  Pascal Dbut du message transfr :

In my opinion we should look at Ole's point-2-point link model before making
protocol changes.

v2.2.0 | Report a Bug | By Email