On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
In and of itself I fully agree with that statement. However, the assumption
that IPv6 is an experimental protocol and enabling it on the various IETF
servers should be considered "testing" isn't exactly a glowing endorsement of
10 years of IETF work.
It sounds distasteful, but we should really be eating your own dog food.
It seems reasonable to make this suggestion to the IASA since the
managemnt of that function is devolving to them. and then be patient since
there are a number of transition related balls are all in the air at the
same time.
Limiting myself to the www.ietf.org webservers (yes, this address points to
two different hosts) it appears this site runs on:
Server: Apache/2.0.46 (Red Hat)
Server: Apache/2.0.40 (Red Hat Linux) DAV/2 mod_ssl/2.0.40 OpenSSL/0.9.7a
Even though these Apache versions are 2 - 3 years old (with many
vulnerabilities found and fixed in the mean time), they're fully capable of
supporting IPv6, as are Red Hat Linux versions of around the same age.
It would be a nice way to mark 7 years of RFC 2460 (or 10 years of RFC 1883,
both were published in december) and the closing of the IPv6 wg with addition
of IPv6 to at least the IETF WWW servers.
(BTW a big "yuck" for being behind two-faced DNS here at the IETF meeting
venue.)
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel Jaeggli Unix Consulting
joelja(_at_)darkwing(_dot_)uoregon(_dot_)edu
GPG Key Fingerprint: 5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf