Do we care in respect of the size of query where IPv6 transport is concerned? Vis-a-vis the lack of fragmentation in v6.
", "time": "2024-03-19T03:16:52Z"}, {"author": "Mark Andrews", "text": "If the echoing servers properly do EDNS version negotiation then bumping the EDNS version number will work.
", "time": "2024-03-19T03:17:18Z"}, {"author": "David Lamparter", "text": "pls tell me what to do as a non snac router :)
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:05:57Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "RA are mainly for hosts though ;-)
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:06:17Z"}, {"author": "David Lamparter", "text": "Yes but routers watch for them too
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:06:37Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "Nodes should ignore what they do not understand
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:07:06Z"}, {"author": "David Lamparter", "text": "Ack. I think the 6mam start could just say \"this bit is for snac, no-one else needs to care\"
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:07:45Z"}, {"author": "David Lamparter", "text": "+1 to Ted
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:07:52Z"}, {"author": "David Lamparter", "text": "s/6mam start/6man doc/ (on phone, sorry)
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:08:43Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "Can I throw LLDP in the mix ? (duck duck)
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:10:45Z"}, {"author": "Chris Box", "text": "edge router?
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:20:53Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "leaf router ?
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:21:02Z"}, {"author": "Erik Kline", "text": "\"leaf router\", yeah
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:21:13Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "Orphaned router ? (absence of downstream router)
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:21:19Z"}, {"author": "Dave Phelan", "text": "Orphaned sounds like it not connected to any Parent
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:22:00Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "@Dave bad English of mine indeed, \"childless\" would be better
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:22:26Z"}, {"author": "Dave Phelan", "text": ":grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:22:41Z"}, {"author": "Erik Kline", "text": "at some point it might as well just be called a \"bridge\"
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:22:58Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "except that bridges do not bridge frames with different MAC address lengths
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:23:36Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "Could also be 'gateway' rather than 'router' as it is a little more than a plain router
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:24:10Z"}, {"author": "Shin Miyakawa", "text": "In uPnP context, there is a word \"IGD\" such as Internet Gateway Device
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:26:16Z"}, {"author": "Erik Kline", "text": "what about wrapping all this in a PvD Option
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:29:03Z"}, {"author": "Esko Dijk", "text": "6LoWPAN networks in general can be multiple-IP-hop, and still single-prefix (at the same time).
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:32:37Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "OTOHRFC 4861 text is:
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:43:18Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "Routers SHOULD inspect valid Router Advertisements sent by other\n routers and verify that the routers are advertising consistent\n information on a link. Detected inconsistencies indicate that one or\n more routers might be misconfigured and SHOULD be logged to system or\n network management.
and later:
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:45:18Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "\nHosts\n accept the union of all received information; the receipt of a Router\n Advertisement MUST NOT invalidate all information received in a\n previous advertisement or from another source.
https://github.com/ietf-wg-snac/draft-ietf-snac-simple/pull/53/files is the link if anyone's finding the screen hard to read
", "time": "2024-03-19T04:56:03Z"}, {"author": "\u00c9ric Vyncke", "text": "Thanks to all and to the WGs chairs
", "time": "2024-03-19T05:00:34Z"}]