On Feb 24, 2004, at 10:09 AM, Fred Templin wrote:
Alain,
Speaking only as an individual wg participant, I appreciate the concerns
you are raising but am hoping that you are not contemplating a divisive
and time-consuming appeals process such as the one we have just come
through for site local deprecation.
No. Stalling tactics go nowhere. I sincerely believe that there are some serious issues
in the document in its current form. I also believe that those issues are fairly
easy to address.
I'm not a partisan of Site Local nor a partisan of those new local addresses.
However, if the wg decides to go with it, fine. Once the issues I've raised
are taken care of, I'd like to see this document progress quickly so
the wg could move on to other important topics.
Please consider that published documents are by no means fixed for all time; rather, there is clear past precedence for course-corrections once operational experience is gained, e.g., through supplementary documents, BCPs, updates to existing documents, etc. (We are in fact seeing numerous instances of the latter in current wg activities.)
I understand that. This is not the case here. There are known issues at this point,
they are not difficult to fix, let's fix them now. This is the responsibility of the wg.
- Alain.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
