On Jul 3, 2011, at 7:10 AM, Gert Doering wrote: > On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 11:11:43PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote: >> There's clearly a lack of consensus to support it. > > There's two very vocal persons opposing it and a much larger number of > people that support it, but have not the time to write a similarily > large amount of e-mails. For me, this is enough for "rough consensus".
There were several people opposing it at Last Call - enough that no amount of emails in favor would result in rough consensus. What this is, is an attempt to railroad this through IETF without getting consensus. > (And I second everything Lorenzo, Randy and Cameron said - there's > theoretical possibilities, and real world. 6to4 fails the real-world > test. Get over it, instead of attacking people that run real-world > networks for the decisions they need to do to keep the networks running > in a world without enough IPv4 addresses). In the real world, there are lots of people successfully using 6to4, and there's no good replacement for it. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
