> It is not up to the IETF to engineer a transition to IPv6, > merely to make the tools available. nor is it up to the IETF to engineer a (very slightly) longer lifetime for IPv4. > Freeing up the former class E space > is an example of making a minor tool available, and it also sends a > strong message that the IETF believes that IPv4's days are numbered, > some people might interpret that message differently. they might believe that since we're making a large chunk of new addresses available, it's okay to keep depending on IPv4. (seems like we're notoriously bad at getting _any_ message across to the public, since IETF says little to the media and we don't object when marketroids from various big name companies claim that we've done things that we haven't done.) Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf