Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 08:57:49 +0900
From: Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>
Subject: [users:00668] Re: call for public review
To: "Anthony Coon" <acoon@vmware.com>
Cc: users@tahi.org
Message-Id: <20080417085749.a73c6a45.akisada@tahi.org>
In-Reply-To: <96B1AAC4C39E684DA09AA17042B1C09A0EF344@PA-EXCH23.vmware.com>
References: <20080414142219.509b73a8.akisada@tahi.org>	<96B1AAC4C39E684DA09AA17042B1C09A0EF344@PA-EXCH23.vmware.com>
X-Mail-Count: 00668

Hi, Tony.

Now, v6eval can work on FreeBSD 7.0-RELEASE.

And Self_Test v4.0.0b1 will just an update of v1.5.0b4.
I'm sorry for making you confused.
From this release,
we thought that it is better to use the same major version/revision as the test specification.
This is the reason that the next of 1.5.0b4 is v4.0.0b1.

And the differences are between v1.4.13 and v4.0.0b1.

Thanks,


On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:27:11 -0700
"Anthony Coon" <acoon@vmware.com> wrote:

> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Is Self_Test_4-0-0b1 ( and v6eval-3.0.14.b1 ) supported on freeBSD 7.0 as
> well as 6.2?
> 
> What became of Self_Test_1.5.0b4?  How does 1.5.0b4 map to 4-0-0b1?
> 
> Finally, you mention below "The differences are", differences between
> 4-0-00b1 and what?
> 
> cheers,
> Tony
> 
> 
> =================
> Tony Coon
> acoon@vmware.com
> 
> "No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yukiyo Akisada [mailto:akisada@tahi.org] 
> Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 10:22 PM
> To: users@tahi.org
> Subject: [users:00663] call for public review
> 
> Hi, all.
> 
> The beta version of Self_Test (Self_Test_4-0-0b1) has been released.
> This release is for public review at IPv6 Ready Logo Program.
> 
> Now,
> IPv6 Ready Logo Program is planning to have the major version up.
> 
> You can find upcoming test specification and test scenario at
> <http://www.ipv6ready.org/announcement/public_review20080411_p2core.html>.
> 
> The differences are
>     1) Support of IPv6 Error message - Beyond Scope of Source Address (Code
> 2)
>        - RFC 4443 Section 3.1
>     2) Support of Deprecation of Type 0 Routing Header - RFC 5095
>     3) Support of Disabling IP Operation once a DAD Failure has occurred.
>        - RFC 4862 Section 5.4.5
>     4) Support of On-link Determination
>        - "a host properly rejects an invalid prefix length,
>           however the prefix length is still valid for on-link determination
>           when the on-link flag is true". - RFC 4862 Section 6.3.4
>     5) Support of Address Architecture - RFC 4291
> 
> If you have comments for test specification and test scenario, please post to
> <ipv6ready-info@ipv6ready.org>.
> 
> If you have comments for test tool itself, please post to <contact@tahi.org>
> or <users@tahi.org>.
> 
> 
> --
> Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Yukiyo Akisada <akisada@tahi.org>