> I am working on an update to the IPv6 address architecture. In doing this
> I am working through the comments on the previous draft. One comment made
> was to remove Section 2.5.5 "IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses"
> from the document. This would include removing the special case in the
> textual representation (section 2.2, 3.).
>
> I would like to solicit the working group's thoughts on this. I don't have
> a strong opinion one way or another. It's not clear it has ever been that
> useful and add a certain degree of complexity. On the other hand, it
> appears in several places in the document and requires some careful
> editing :-)
>
> Since I expect this is widely implemented, please be sure to report any
> problem that might occur if this is to be removed from the
> specification. This includes would it break other documents that refer to
> the IPv6 address architecture specification.
>
> The plan is to submit the updated draft for Draft Standard. In general
> removing things that are not found to be useful is OK when going to Draft
> standard.
I support the removal of section 2.5.5 and section 2.2(3).
IPv4 compatible address is not used any more as auto tunnel went away.
my position on IPv4 mapped address is described in the following
documents:
draft-cmetz-v6ops-v4mapped-api-harmful-01.txt
draft-itojun-v6ops-v4mapped-harmful-02.txt
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
