On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 02:43:10PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 01:32:00PM -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
Yes, right now IPv6 deployment isn't good enough that we can't do this
without using all sorts of workarounds. OK, let's document those
workarounds and make them available to the attendees. If it means
that the IETF network provider has to hijack the root, then let them
hijack the root on the IETF network, and document that fact. If there
needs to be NAT-PT bridges to allow IETF'res to get back to their home
networks connected to ISP's that don't yet offer IPv6 connectivty,
then let there be NAT-PT bridges --- and document them. If various
Windows, Macintosh, and Linux laptops need special configuration so to
work around other problems, then document what the workarounds should
be, and give people early warning and access to them.
- Ted
as offical spokesmodel for the IETF in your role
as Sgt at Arms, your you SURE you want to advocate
the IETF abandon its published statement wrt there
being ONE ROOT ...
--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf