On 17 April 2018 at 17:23, Olivier Bonaventure <
olivier.bonavent...@uclouvain.be> wrote:
> Jeff, RTGWG,
>
>>
>> The authors have requested the RTGWG to last call
>> draft-ietf-rtgwg-enterprise-pa-multihoming.
>>
>> There was consensus that document is ready for the last call and the
>> authors ha
On Wed., 13 Mar. 2019, 14:03 William Atwood,
wrote:
> Shyam,
>
> Specifically:
>
> Marcelo Bagnulo, Alberto Garcia-Martinez, Juan Rodriguez, and Arturo
> Azcorra, "The Case for Source Address Dependent Routing in Multihoming",
> International Workshop on Quality of Future Internet Services (QofIS
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 at 14:03, William Atwood
wrote:
>
> Shyam,
>
> Specifically:
>
> Marcelo Bagnulo, Alberto Garcia-Martinez, Juan Rodriguez, and Arturo
> Azcorra, "The Case for Source Address Dependent Routing in Multihoming",
> International Workshop on Quality of Future Internet Services (QofI
Has it been implemented and then deployed? Has it been proven to work?
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020, 17:29 shyam bandyopadhyay, wrote:
> Dear Adrian,
>
> I would like to appeal once again to consider the following drafts
> to be published under the Independent Submission stream.
>
> 1. draft-shyam-vlsmtr
What are TCP proxy engines?
What are TCP flow engines?
In which RFCs are they described?
On Mon, 2 Aug 2021, 02:47 Vasilenko Eduard,
wrote:
> Hi Alexander,
>
>
>
> Have I understood your presentation right?
>
> The client SHOULD change IPv6 flow label after SYN RTO to have a chance to
> be mo
On Tue, 17 Aug 2021, 16:46 Alexander Azimov,
wrote:
> Eduard,
>
> Please see the quote from the slide 28. My suggestion was:
>
> Client – sends SYN, Server – responds with SYN&ACK
>
>- In case of SYN_RTO or RTO events Server SHOULD recalculate its TCP
>socket hash, thus change Flow Label.
On Fri, 30 June 2023, 04:19 Joel Halpern,
wrote:
> One of the arguments made in these documents seems to be that by using
> this technology you can reduce latency by skipping the DNS step.
>
> I do not see how that works. Are you assuming that applications will
> have the anycast address for a g
Hi,
I support WG adoption.
Regards,
Mark.
On Tue, 21 May 2024 at 07:40, Yingzhen Qu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This email begins a 2 week WG adoption poll for the following draft:
> draft-llsyang-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02 - Destination/Source Routing (ietf.org)
>
> There is currently no IPR disclosure
RFC9131 does for IPv6.
LLDP seems to me to be the wrong tool for the job. LLDP support may be
common, however ARP and ND are required for all IPv4 or IPv6
implementations (or at least IPv4 implementations post the invention of
Ethernet).
Regards,
Mark.
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025, 04:34 Linda Dunbar,
