Re: IANA Action: Assignment of an IPV6 Hop-by-hop Option

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Ned,

> > To state that somewhat differently, since we cannot effectively
> > prohibit the deployment of an extension or option of which the
> > IETF disapproves, the best things we can do for the Internet are
> > make it as easy as possible to identify the use of the extension
> > so it can be effectively quarantined and to make information
> > about why we consider it a bad idea readily available.
> > Ironically, both of those goals are most strongly aided by
> > registering the extension and assigning an appropriate
> > identifier, rather than rejecting registration requests and
> > hoping the idea goes away.
> 
> Very nicely put, John. I completely agree. And to the extent we have "running
> code" in this area, I believe it supports this view.

What was the reason(s) the request was made for an assignment
that required IESG Approval, rather than either Specification
Required or First Come First Serve ?

Yakov.

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]