In message <4E2F4491(_dot_)30102(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>, Brian E Carpenter
writes:
Alex,
Since 6to4 is a transition mechanism it has no long term future
*by definition*. Even if someone chooses to design a v2, who is going to
implement it?
If you have a reason to install and enable 6to4, why would the nominal
status of a couple of RFCs make you do anything different?
Of course, if implementors choose to drop the code you might not be
able to upgrade software versions - but hopefully by that time you
will have native IPv6 service anyway.
Which is exactly why HISTORIC is NOT appropriate.
Regards
Brian Carpenter
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka(_at_)isc(_dot_)org
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf