Hi Tony,
I am not sure what your point is exactly, or why you want to make
this point on the full IETF list...
Are you suggesting that the options open to the IPv6 WG should
be constrained by the drafts that Bob and I list on the agenda?
By Thursday, the agenda had actually changed to a joint presentation
by me and Bob on the trade-offs between different site-local usage
options.
We also had a discussion section listed (on both the published
and final agendas) that you omitted, and during that discussion
the WG members in the room chose to reject the recommendations
that Bob and I had made, and they chose to deprecate site local
addresses. Frankly, I was as surprised as you were.
Like all consensus reached in WG meetings, this consensus _will_
be confirmed on the list. You will get your chance to express
your opinion there. You have your chance, right now, to make
any arguments on the list that you think will persuade people
not to deprecate site-local addresses.
Unless you think that there is an issue here that is of wider
IETF interest, perhaps we could move this discussion to the IPv6
WG mailing list?
Margaret
At 05:26 PM 3/27/2003 -0800, Tony Hain wrote:
Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> There have been people calling for the complete removal of
> site-local addressing all along.
>
> And, elimination/deprecation was quite clearly raised as an
> option in Atlanta. At that time, we called for opinions on
> the following
> options: elimination, "limited", "moderate" or "full" usage,
> and each of the four options had some support in that WG meeting.
And in Atlanta we all agreed to take elimination off the list, and it
has not been discussed since. The agenda for SF was:
Site-Local Addressing
Impact of site-local addressing -- Margaret Wasserman (20 min)
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wasserman-ipv6-sl-impact-02.tx
t
"Limited Usage" Summary -- Margaret Wasserman (5 min)
[See appendix of draft-wasserman-ipv6-sl-impact-02, above.]
"Moderate Usage" Proposal -- Bob Hinden (15 min)
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hinden-ipv6-sl-moderate-01.txt
Nowhere in that or the mail preceding the meeting is elimination
mentioned.
Tony