Alain Durand wrote:
I have a last comment on section 4 deprecation.
The document says:
"The special behavior of this prefix MUST no longer be supported in new implementations"
and later on it says:
"Existing implementations and deployments MAY continue to use this prefix."
I find those 2 statements a bit confusing. What about new deployments using old implementations?
I think the implication is that you're running a risk if you deploy site-locals with old implementations because at some point that code might not be there.
As I have pointed out in the past, the definition of a new vs old implementation
is a very fuzy concept, I think that this document should not over specify things here.
I think we're doing too much wordsmithing. The whole notion of deprecation is deployment advice. It's the step you take before telling people to remove something from code.
It would actually be much simpler and less confusing to say only "The special behavior of this prefix SHOULD no longer be supported" and nothing about existing deployments.
This doesn't work operationally, because people use site-locals today. And as we've debated endlessly we don't do flag days anymore.
IMHO this text is good enough to ship.
Eliot
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
