On Jun 9, 2011, at 7:37 AM, Keith Moore wrote:
Clearly the intent of this draft and protocol action are to discourage use
of 6to4, particularly in new implementations. You can't discourage use of
6to4 in new implementations without harming people who are already using it
and depending on it.
After it became clear to me that IETF will not be issuing a phase-out plan for
6to4, I recommended to all the relevant product managers at Apple that we
should continue supporting 6to4 in new implementations for the foreseeable
future (despite the non-RFC2119 'not recommended' line in section 1).
I don't see why this draft should discourage anyone from continuing to support
6to4, which as you point out is a *uniquely* useful protocol that people depend
on and find *irreplaceable*. Reclassifying it as Historic simply allows IETF
working groups to operate on the fiction that 6to4 will eventually disappear
someday in the indefinite and vaguely hopeful future. While I don't think that
self-delusion will be a good thing for IETF in the long run, I have a hard time
getting too bummed out about it. Pragmatism will find its way into
deliberations.
Yes, I think this draft is a pointless waste of time. The reason I support
publishing it, however, is that I disagree with your assessment of the harm it
could do. Also, it enjoys widespread support in the V6OPS working group and
the opposition, while vocal, seems quite small. That looks like rough
consensus to me, and if I can help get it off our agenda sooner by supporting
it rather than opposing it, then I say let's print it.
I confidently predict the reclassification to Historic will be roundly ignored
not just by Apple product engineering but by the entire industry. We're smart
enough to recognize that we're not the target audience for the RFC. The draft
that matters is the companion advisory draft. It would be nice if the
6to4-to-historic draft could be spiked so as not to distract from its
companion, but I don't see that as a likely outcome. Alas and alack.
--
james woodyatt <jhw(_at_)apple(_dot_)com>
member of technical staff, core os networking
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf