Philip,
On 2011-06-10 03:18, Philip Homburg wrote:
...
I think this is likely to happen anyway. In all discussions it has been come
clear that 6to4 has nothing to offer for ordinary users,
In all fairness, that depends on your definition of "ordinary".
Where I differ from Keith is that I don't think we harm the current
ordinary (or extraordinary) 6to4 users by relabelling the RFCs.
As long as all operators do what draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-advisory
suggests, of course. I wouldn't support the -historic draft if
the -advisory draft wasn't coming along too.
and that the situation
is going to get worse over time (more NAT, more broken 6to4 installation).
More NAT44, yes. But *less* broken 6to4 if operators implement -advisory.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf