Re: Last Call: <draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt> (DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements) to Best Current Practice
2014-05-29 15:48:57Patrik,
In April 2012, the IETF, via BCP177, already stated "IPv6 is required" yet B, E, and G still do not support IPv6 (yes, I'm sure there are reasons, that's not the point).I am more nervous over what the impact will be if IETF stop saying IPv6 is required.
I don't believe anyone is proposing moving BCP177 to historic.
If IETF do not say so it is impossible to say that B, E and G does not live up to whatever requirement IETF set.
The requirement for IPv6 appears to have been set in 2012 ("IPv6 Support
Required for All IP-Capable Nodes") if not before. I'm disappointed that people
would argue that Yet Another IETF RFC is required to get folks to do stuff they
already know they should be doing.
Regards,
-drc
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
| Previous by Date: | Re: Last Call: <draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt> (DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements) to Best Current Practice, manning bill |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: inquiry re. the state of protocol R&D, Carlos M. Martinez |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Last Call: <draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt> (DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements) to Best Current Practice, Patrik Fältström |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Last Call: <draft-iab-2870bis-01.txt> (DNS Root Name Service Protocol and Deployment Requirements) to Best Current Practice, Patrik Fältström |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |