Subject: Call for RFC 3041 Implementation Reports

From: Brian Haberman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 05:20:25 -0400

All,
      As mentioned during the IPv6 WG meeting, the chairs are soliciting
implementation reports for IPv6 Privacy Addresses in support of moving  
the spec
to Draft Standard.  The following template should be used for submitting
these implementation reports.  The reports can be sent to the chairs  
and/or
the mailing list.

      Implementation Report for RFC 3041 (IPv6 Privacy Addresses)
       
------------------------------------------------------------------------

      1. Implementation Name:

      2. Submitter Name:

      3. Submitter E-mail:

      4. Code Origin:

      5. Features Implemented:

      6. Tested Interoperability by Feature:

           A. Lifetime Management (Section 3.4)

           B. DAD Operation (Section 3.2)

Regards,
Bob & Brian
IPv6 WG co-chairs
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉<[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:59:46 +0900

>>>>> On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 05:20:25 -0400, 
>>>>> Brian Haberman <[email-masked]> said:

> these implementation reports.  The reports can be sent to the chairs  

(snip)

>            B. DAD Operation (Section 3.2)

I'm not sure what "interoperability" should be reported about
those...as far as I understand, these are only a matter of the host
using RFC3041, and I don't see any "interoperability" issue here.
Could you clarify the required information?

Regarding DAD, which specification should be the base of the report,
RFC3041 or draft-ietf-ipv6-privacy-addrs-v2-04.txt?  (The behavior on
this is very different between these two versions of the spec).

In either case, I suspect "Section 3.2" should actually be "Section
3.3" (more specifically, Step 7 of Section 3.3).  In fact, neither
RFC3041 or privacy-addrs mentions DAD in Section 3.2 as a part of the
protocol specification.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					[email-masked]