6to4 to Experimental? (was: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic)

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

 



On Jul 3, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Ronald Bonica wrote:

> Folks,
> 
> I think that I get it. There is no IETF consensus regarding the compromise proposed below. So, at very least, we will have to abandon the compromise.
> 
> Right now, the only alternative that I see is to reintroduce draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic and let the appeal process run its course. I hate to do this, because the appeals process can be an incredible time sync and distraction. If anybody sees another alternative, please propose it.
> 
>                                                              Ron
>                                                             <speaking as AD>

The alternative that I proposed to IESG and to the chairs (and never received any feedback about) was to reclassify 6to4 as Experimental.   Experimental seems completely appropriate for a protocol that is useful, but only in corner cases.  And I think it's also appropriate and useful to try to learn from the experience with 6to4, even if we realize that 6to4 will never be a generally applicable IPv6 transition solution again.

And maybe, just maybe, Experimental will be enough of a "slap" at 6to4 to mollify the "kill it yesterday" crowd.  For one thing, it clearly indicates that 6to4 is no longer a standard.

But in order to quieten down the discussion here, I suggest that people reply to me privately if they can't live with this.   If I get lots of those replies, I'll know that it's not worth pursuing.

Keith

_______________________________________________
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]