On Jul 3, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote: > Folks, > > I think that I get it. There is no IETF consensus regarding the compromise > proposed below. So, at very least, we will have to abandon the compromise. > > Right now, the only alternative that I see is to reintroduce > draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic and let the appeal process run its course. > I hate to do this, because the appeals process can be an incredible time sync > and distraction. If anybody sees another alternative, please propose it. > > Ron > <speaking as AD>
The alternative that I proposed to IESG and to the chairs (and never received any feedback about) was to reclassify 6to4 as Experimental. Experimental seems completely appropriate for a protocol that is useful, but only in corner cases. And I think it's also appropriate and useful to try to learn from the experience with 6to4, even if we realize that 6to4 will never be a generally applicable IPv6 transition solution again. And maybe, just maybe, Experimental will be enough of a "slap" at 6to4 to mollify the "kill it yesterday" crowd. For one thing, it clearly indicates that 6to4 is no longer a standard. But in order to quieten down the discussion here, I suggest that people reply to me privately if they can't live with this. If I get lots of those replies, I'll know that it's not worth pursuing. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
