A bit late since this threat will be moderated soon. But I strongly object
to this delay of needed action.
I guess the other way the problem, which will hurt muchmuch more is maybe to
considering a filter of 6to4 on isp level?
I will suggest it when we start deploying native ipv6.
--- Roger J. ---
On Jul 2, 2011 6:39 PM, "Ronald Bonica" <rbonica(_at_)juniper(_dot_)net> wrote:
Folks,
Whereas there has been considerable controversy regarding
draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic, the v6ops chairs and document author have
agreed to the following course of action:
- the V6OPS WG will withdraw its request to publish
draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic
- The author will introduce a new draft, intended for standards track
publication. The new draft will update RFCs 3056 and 3068. It will say that
if 6-to-4 is implemented, it must be turned off by default.
- In order for the new draft to be published, it must achieve both V6OPS
WG and IETF consensus
If anyone objects to this course of action, please speak up soon.
Ron
<Speaking as OPS Area AD>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf