> As the IPv6 working group draws to a close the *only* proper action is to > recommend to the IESG that all stable and eligible documents be progressed > along the standards track. The IESG will do whatever it would anyway, so it > does no good to try to fineness things by endless debates about last minute > tweaks and the resulting potential to recycle in place. If there are minor > clarifications to make, those should be done as independent documents in the > context of addenda to the stable documents. IPv6 as the components which > functionally replace RFC 791, 826, etc. is complete. Solving problems that > are still unsolved in IPv4 remains as work for continuing or future working > groups. That does not diminish the stability of the base documents, so they > need to progress now.
For what it's worth, I think Tony makes an excellent point. I think that we've done good work in the IPv6 on developing & progressing these documents, and we should not try to second guess what the IESG will or will not say. John -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
