On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Ronald Bonica <rbonica@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Folks, > > After some discussion, the IESG is attempting to determine whether there is IETF consensus to do the following: > > - add a new section to draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic > - publish draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic as INFORMATIONAL > > draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic will obsolete RFCs 3056 and 3068 and convert their status to HISTORIC. It will also contain a new section describing what it means for RFCs 3056 and 3068 to be classified as HISTORIC. The new section will say that: > > - 6-to-4 should not be configured by default on any implementation (hosts, cpe routers, other) > - vendors will decide whether/when 6-to-4 will be removed from implementations. Likewise, operators will decide whether/when 6-to-4 relays will be removed from their networks. The status of RFCs 3056 and 3068 should not be interpreted as a recommendation to remove 6-to-4 at any particular time. > > > draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic will not update RFC 2026. While it clarifies the meaning of "HISTORIC" in this particular case, it does not set a precedent for any future case. > > Please post your views on this course of action by August 8, 2011. Supported. Guess there are so many against for whatever reason so the consensus part will be hard. The archive have probably all of the arguments. But whatever happen with this one, can we please move on and focus on the one and only important thing, native IPv6. All the other are work around. -- Roger Jorgensen | rogerj@xxxxxxxxx | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no ; | roger@xxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf