On 25 Jul 2011, at 17:30, Ronald Bonica wrote:
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.
This scares me. I was on the point of saying, "But none of that stuff makes it
historic!" but you then change what "Historic" means, so that I can no longer
be certain ...
I'd like to see the text, but my feeling is that, no, I will not approve. That
document is too loaded with dubious claims and 6to4 hate for my liking. And
the advisory document is already perfect for expressing the _real_ problems,
that really _do_ exist, for (current) 6to4 deployment. Once again, "Historic"
(in whatever sense meant) is just too strong an applied label to something
which _can_ be used. I have a very hard time seeing the sense in this document.
But let's see the text. Perhaps you can redefine the word "Historic" in a new
and interesting way.
Cheers,
Sabahattin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf