Greg,
With my AD hat on, you are correct: intarea WG is currently the only suitable
WG for discussion as its charter includes:
The Internet Area Working Group (INTAREA WG) acts primarily as a forum
for discussing far-ranging topics that affect the entire area. Such
topics include, for instance, address space issues, basic IP layer
functionality, and architectural questions.
But please also note the 2nd condition for new work in
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intarea/about/
Up to the authors if they want to try to get this work adopted but, honestly, I
have hard time to see this being adopted.
Regards
-éric
On 18/11/2021, 05:50, "Int-area on behalf of Greg Skinner"
<[email protected] on behalf of
[email protected]> wrote:
On the general subject of the recent IPv4 Unicast Extensions Project
drafts, is the intarea WG the intended WG for adopting them? I ask because
discussion of issues raised in these drafts took place in the sunset4 WG before
it concluded.
Regards, Greg
> On Nov 15, 2021, at 11:09 PM, Loganaden Velvindron <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> I would support seeing this work move forward. There are still many
> countries in the developing world who will not be able to update to
> IPv6 any time soon due to legacy equipment and will be using IPv4 for
> a long time.
>
> (Disclaimer: I submitted a few patches to the IPv4 extension project).
>
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
