Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic

[Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jul 2, 2011, at 9:10 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Is the reasoning behind the decision explained somewhere? My reading of the threads on the subject in v6ops was that the opposition to 6to4-historic was a small but vocal minority, and I thought that qualified as rough consensus.

Even if there was rough consensus within v6ops, rough consensus of v6ops does not equate to rough consensus of the entire IETF community.

And who says that "rough consensus of the entire IETF community" is that this draft should not be published? Were there public discussions to that effect that came to this conclusion?

There's clearly a lack of consensus to support it.

Keith

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf