Hi,
Regarding RFC 6636, I don't know anything about it. It wasn't published
until last month, so MLDv2 in FreeBSD came 3 years before it.
On 21/06/12 14:16, GuYong wrote:
> > > My reading of it suggests that we are doing the right thing. We do
> > > accept it and process it, but, like the text im
ubject: Re: Question about MLDv2 implemenation in Kernel
>
> All,
>
> I'm working on something new just now,and am in a conference, but here
> is my 2p.
>
> On 20/06/12 22:20, Rui Paulo wrote:
> > On 20 Jun 2012, at 01:12, GuYong wrote:
> >> 1. RFC3810
All,
I'm working on something new just now,and am in a conference, but here
is my 2p.
On 20/06/12 22:20, Rui Paulo wrote:
> On 20 Jun 2012, at 01:12, GuYong wrote:
>> 1. RFC3810 clause 6.1 mentions there is a Source Retransmission Counter
>> associated to each source, so that the merged report
On 20 Jun 2012, at 01:12, GuYong wrote:
> 1. RFC3810 clause 6.1 mentions there is a Source Retransmission Counter
> associated to each source, so that the merged report could contain the
> content that is interrupted by a new state change report BUT, I
> didn't see this is implemented
Hi,
On 20 Jun 2012, at 01:12, GuYong wrote:
>
> Hi, everyone,
> I'm looking at the MLDv2 implemenation in kernel, and there seem to be some
> issues, could anyone confirm them?
> 1. RFC3810 clause 6.1 mentions there is a Source Retransmission Counter
> associated to each source, so that the
Hi, everyone,
I'm looking at the MLDv2 implemenation in kernel, and there seem to be some
issues, could anyone confirm them?
1. RFC3810 clause 6.1 mentions there is a Source Retransmission Counter
associated to each source, so that the merged report could contain the content
that is interrupte
