In your letter dated Wed, 27 Jul 2011 12:38:33 +1000 you wrote: >In message <4E2F4491.30102@xxxxxxxxx>, Brian E Carpenter writes: >> Of course, if implementors choose to drop the code you might not be >> able to upgrade software versions - but hopefully by that time you >> will have native IPv6 service anyway. > >Which is exactly why HISTORIC is NOT appropriate. With rfc3484-revise and the documented brokenness of 6to4, it doesn't make any sense for implementors to offer 6to4 anyhow. So I think it would be quite weird to keep 6to4 at standards track just to prevent some vendors from dropping 6to4 support. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf