> Il 08/05/2020 21:37 John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto: > > In article <CABcZeBO_6vwxn3XTJfJvHGifx-boyKQ2KxVAS2-x-i5NFKpd9w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> you write: > >First, I think you are wrong on the merits. I do not believe that support > >for IPv6 (nor DNSSEC, nor TLS 1.3) should be a primary criterion for > >selecting tools. It may make us sad that these technologies are not being > >adopted at a faster rate but I don't think that inconveniencing ourselves > >in order to make a statement is the right answer. > > I happen to agree with this sentiment but I really wish we could give > this endless argument a rest. > > It's come up over and over for at least a decade, we have never come close > to resolving it, and we're not going to do it right now. Putting together the last few messages in this thread, a logical conclusion would be that to solve this argument permanently you need an RFC that says that the IETF is not going to do this. -- Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange vittorio.bertola@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy
