On Jul 3, 2011, at 7:10 AM, Gert Doering wrote:
On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 11:11:43PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
There's clearly a lack of consensus to support it.
There's two very vocal persons opposing it and a much larger number of
people that support it, but have not the time to write a similarily
large amount of e-mails. For me, this is enough for "rough consensus".
There were several people opposing it at Last Call - enough that no amount of
emails in favor would result in rough consensus. What this is, is an attempt
to railroad this through IETF without getting consensus.
(And I second everything Lorenzo, Randy and Cameron said - there's
theoretical possibilities, and real world. 6to4 fails the real-world
test. Get over it, instead of attacking people that run real-world
networks for the decisions they need to do to keep the networks running
in a world without enough IPv4 addresses).
In the real world, there are lots of people successfully using 6to4, and
there's no good replacement for it.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf