RE: draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic

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

 



Subject to reading the not-available-yet text, I support this approach.
It appears to be reasonable political compromise.

Michel.


-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Ronald Bonica
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2011 9:36 AM
To: v6ops@xxxxxxxx; IETF Discussion
Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic

Folks,

Whereas there has been considerable controversy regarding
draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic, the v6ops chairs and document author
have agreed to the following course of action:

- the V6OPS WG will withdraw its request to publish
draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic
- The author will introduce a new draft, intended for standards track
publication. The new draft will update RFCs 3056 and 3068. It will say
that if 6-to-4 is implemented, it must be turned off by default. 
- In order for the new draft to be published, it must achieve both V6OPS
WG and IETF consensus

If anyone objects to this course of action, please speak up soon.

                                                    Ron
                                                    <Speaking as OPS
Area AD>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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