Because we want to make all combinations work. Because we want IPv6 to
be real.
Why move it to another draft when the same contention will occur.
The opponents just have to face the music. And if they are going to
take issue with this, what about the bigger more critical issues? Will
those take decades to resolve? Don't we have a deployment deadline for
IPv6?
Dino
On Jul 30, 2009, at 4:33 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
From: Lars Eggert <lars.egg...@nokia.com>
Alternatively, you could pick a different encapsulation
Dino, why don't we just drop the 'inside IPv6' encapsulations from
the spec?
I.e. keep only IPv4 in IPv4 and IPv6 in IPv4? The IPv6
encapsulations could be
documented in a short non-IETF note that's posted on a personal web
page
somewhere. (I'm assuming here that there are a few ISPs who'd
actually want to
run inside IPv6, otherwise we could just drop them entirely.)
Noel
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
l...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
