Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-64share WGLC

IMHO it is better to keep this draft focused solely on address sharing, and not to go to other configuration topic or other possible problems.

Btw most often, as of now, the "original" DNS server addresses are received via link layer signaling (see http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis-06.txt section 2.10), and thus, for example, may need to be added to "proxied" RA.

Best regards,

Teemu

-----Original Message-----
From: "Tassos Chatzithomaoglou" <achatz@forthnetgroup.gr>
Sent: ‎15.‎9.‎2013 23:20
To: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-64share WGLC

Just a quick question...

I don't see any reference of DNS servers under 3.1, only MTU & Prefix.
Shouldn't there be a bullet showing that DNS info (UE address as DNS proxy, or original through-RA/DHCPv6 DNS servers) should also pass on the LAN link?

--
Tassos

Fred Baker wrote on 15/9/2013 21:00:
> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-64share.  Please read it now. If you find nits
> (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the
> authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a
> statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed,
> please post your comments to the list.
>
> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the
> document as well as its content. If you have read the document and
> believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important
> comment to make.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops