Re: RFC5798 requires usage of RAs?
Stephen Nadas <[email protected]> Thu, 28 Apr 2011 13:48:40 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.vrrp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <450AE4BEC513614F96969DDA34F359341928928499@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se> |
If you have cycles to propose text, that would be helpful, IMO. Thanks, Steve -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Roesen Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 1:20 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [VRRP] RFC5798 requires usage of RAs? Hi, On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:36:44AM -0400, Stephen Nadas wrote: > Sorry for the delay. I think the spec language could be better- > (630) etc probably should have said something more like > > "if ND RAs are in use, MUST send ND Router Advertisements for the virtual router. Indeed. Thanks for the confirmation. My understanding of IETF procedures is, that an Errata submission would be possible, valid way to unambiguate that language - which is advisable to prevent further implementation confusion. Shall I go ahead and draft up an erratum or do you want to take up on that yourself? Best regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: [email protected] -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0 _______________________________________________ vrrp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp _______________________________________________ vrrp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp