> IPv4 mapped address > if I remember correctly draft-itojun-v6ops-v4mapped-harmful-02.txt > (IPv4 mapped address on-wire is harmful) got enough consensus. please > document that IPv4 mapped address is not permitted on wire, in 2.5.5.
That would seem inconsistent with the SIIT RFC which is a proposed standard. Thus *if* we should ban IPv4 mapped addresses on the wire, the correct order would be to deprecated the SIIT RFC first and then update the addressing architecture. And it seems like v6ops WG is on the path to clarify the applicability of NAT-PT and SIIT and not downright deprecating them. > IPv4 compatible address > 2.5.5 states that "The IPv6 transition mechanisms [TRAN] include..." > for IPv4 compatible address. however, [TRAN] (RFC2893) no longer > includes automatic tunnel. Incorrect. Is it not until the update to RFC 2893 (currently an internet-draft) that automatic tunnels and compatible addresses have been removed. Given that this draft will hopefully be finished by v6ops I actually think it is ok to remove the IPv4 compatible addresses from addr-arch at this point in time. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
