I'm also completely mystified as to why IPv6 support for all proposed/requested
features is not an explicitly stated requirement, even at this phase. It's not
always as simple as "we'll make sure we make it IPv6 capable when we implement
it..." with the sorts of solutions you're looking for here. Knowing that we
require this at this phase would allow for some vendor self-selection or proper
time to fix the gaps prior to formal proposals, so that we don't end up with
lip service around IPv6 support.
Wes George
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to
copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the
contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and
any printout.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf