On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Ronald Bonica <rbonica(_at_)juniper(_dot_)net>
wrote:
Folks,
After some discussion, the IESG is attempting to determine whether there is
IETF consensus to do the following:
- add a new section to draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic
- publish draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic as INFORMATIONAL
draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic will obsolete RFCs 3056 and 3068 and
convert their status to HISTORIC. It will also contain a new section
describing what it means for RFCs 3056 and 3068 to be classified as HISTORIC.
The new section will say that:
- 6-to-4 should not be configured by default on any implementation (hosts,
cpe routers, other)
- vendors will decide whether/when 6-to-4 will be removed from
implementations. Likewise, operators will decide whether/when 6-to-4 relays
will be removed from their networks. The status of RFCs 3056 and 3068 should
not be interpreted as a recommendation to remove 6-to-4 at any particular
time.
draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic will not update RFC 2026. While it
clarifies the meaning of "HISTORIC" in this particular case, it does not set
a precedent for any future case.
Please post your views on this course of action by August 8, 2011.
Supported.
Guess there are so many against for whatever reason so the consensus
part will be hard.
The archive have probably all of the arguments.
But whatever happen with this one, can we please move on and focus on
the one and only important thing, native IPv6. All the other are work
around.
--
Roger Jorgensen |
rogerj(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com | - IPv6 is The Key!
http://www.jorgensen.no ; | roger(_at_)jorgensen(_dot_)no
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf