Re: IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?

[Ray Soucy <rps () maine edu>]

I mean no disrespect.

What I meant by that post was that I look forward to reading something
along the lines of:

----8<----

1. I believe RA should be moved to HISTORICAL status because of the
following concerns:

2. A better way to provide routing information to host systems would be:

----8<----

This would be far more productive than arguing line-by-line against
other statements without presenting what exactly it is that your
arguing in favor of.

Give us the big picture.

After reading some of your work on end-to-end multihoming, I think I
understand some of what you're trying to say.  My problem is that
while you seem to have a very strong academic understanding of
networking, you seem to be ignoring operational realities in
implementation.




On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Ray Soucy <rps () maine edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Masataka Ohta
> <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp> wrote:
> > No counter argument possible against such abstract nonsense.
>
> Yes.  That was my point.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Ray Soucy
>
> Epic Communications Specialist
>
> Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526
>
> Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System
> http://www.networkmaine.net/



-- 
Ray Soucy

Epic Communications Specialist

Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526

Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System
http://www.networkmaine.net/