A bit late since this threat will be moderated soon. But I strongly object to this delay of needed action.
I guess the other way the problem, which will hurt muchmuch more is maybe to considering a filter of 6to4 on isp level? I will suggest it when we start deploying native ipv6. --- Roger J. --- On Jul 2, 2011 6:39 PM, "Ronald Bonica" <rbon...@juniper.net> wrote: > Folks, > > Whereas there has been considerable controversy regarding draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic, the v6ops chairs and document author have agreed to the following course of action: > > - the V6OPS WG will withdraw its request to publish draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic > - The author will introduce a new draft, intended for standards track publication. The new draft will update RFCs 3056 and 3068. It will say that if 6-to-4 is implemented, it must be turned off by default. > - In order for the new draft to be published, it must achieve both V6OPS WG and IETF consensus > > If anyone objects to this course of action, please speak up soon. > > Ron > <Speaking as OPS Area AD> > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
