Ran, > > I agree that there is not sufficient operational experience > with RFC-4429 to justify changing the text in this draft. > > If at some future point sufficient operational experience > is demonstrated, then that experience might justify a change. > However, we ought not hold up this draft while waiting for > that experience to magically appear.
I don't have a strong opinion on the specifics of RFC-4429, but I want to point out the having sufficient operational experience isn't the only criteria for including something in node requirements. It can be something we think everyone should implement. For example, the recent consensus to change DHCPv6 to a SHOULD, was more about making sure that all hosts implement it given current deployment models. Bob -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
