On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Paul Vixie wrote:
Brian E Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I wouldn't, at this time. We need to see where the RAM/RRG discussions
lead. If they lead to a clear need for registered globally unique
identifiers in IPv6 address format, something like this might be right
(unless we also need a cryptographic property).
where are those discussions being held, and can you post a summary, and why
are we wasting our keystrokes discussing this if there's a preclusive topic
being discussed somewhere entirely else?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and I gave up following that discussion months ago. Way too
much chitchat one way or the other as I see it and no real consensus
forming in one way or another.
Don't think we should wait for RAM/RRG to agree, let us agree on our
understanding and at a later stage when they have come up with a "final"
solution we can compare our understanding with their and see if there
is a need for adjustment.
--
------------------------------
Roger Jorgensen | - ROJO9-RIPE - RJ85P-NORID
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | - IPv6 is The Key!
-------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
