On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Ronald Bonica <rbonica(_at_)juniper(_dot_)net>
wrote:
- 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.
Great, back to square one.
Is the reasoning behind the decision explained somewhere? My reading of the
threads on the subject in v6ops was that the opposition to 6to4-historic was
a small but vocal minority, and I thought that qualified as rough consensus.
But perhaps I missed some discussion.
Also, why do the author and the chairs think that the new draft will do any
better than 6to4-historic? I would assume that the same people who spoke up
against 6to4-historic will speak up against the new document, and since that
level of opposition was sufficient to prevent the publication
of 6to4-historic, it may be sufficient to prevent publication of the new
document as well. If so, we will have spent 3-6 months arguing about it for
naught.
Please, nobody answer this question with "welcome to the IETF" :-)
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf