Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGM] Proxy ARP for IPv6 update

--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Whether it is a separate clause number, or just a separate paragraph like the TCLAS element Type-4 (9.4.2.30), it makes it very clear the process for either IPv4 or IPv6.
I think that when we combine, we have the potential for confusion/ambiguity that we are trying to avoid.
Jon
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Rosdahl                             Engineer, Senior Staff
 IEEE 802 Executive Secretary   Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
office: 801-492-4023                  10871 North 5750 West
cell:   801-376-6435                   Highland, UT 84003

A Job is only necessary to eat!
A Family is necessary to be happy!!


On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 8:52 AM Venkatesan, Ganesh <ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---

Hello Jerome and Pascal:

 

You may to see how it is done for IPv4 and IPv6 with the TCLAS element Type-4 (in Clause 9.4.2.30 of IEEE802.11-2020)

 

Cheers—

Ganesh.

 

From: Jerome Henry (jerhenry) <00001307e486ca96-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2022 7:39 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGM] Proxy ARP for IPv6 update

 

--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---

Dear all,

 

Today in the 11me call we presented this document, that proposes a fix to the definition of “proxy ARP” for Ipv6 (given that Proxy ARP does not exist in Ipv6, and in general ND and addressing present different challenges in Ipv6 than in IPv4).

 

One feedback received was a question about the split of Ipv4 and IPv6 (thus having one subclause to define the proxy function for IPv4, another subclause for the same function in IPv6). We did not hear a lot of feedback on that idea. Splitting adds clarity, but may also cause deeper changes to our spec. Please provide feedback to the list to give us a direction on whether to keep a single clause describing each mode (“For IPv4” -> some paragraphs, than a new paragraph starting with “For IPv6” -> some other paragraphs).

 

 

Thanks!

 

Pascal and Jerome

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1