On Jul 27, 2011, at 4:32 AM, Philip Homburg wrote: > > So I think it would be quite weird to keep 6to4 at standards track just to prevent some vendors from dropping 6to4 support. As one of those implementers-- as in, it will probably be *my* commit to the repository that does "rm $XNU/bsd/net/if_stf.c"—- I now feel compelled to reiterate that I would prefer a more controlled phase-out plan than, "equipment vendors and operators are free to commence the destruction of 6to4 at their individual convenience and without further warning to the user community." In the absence of a coherent instruction from IETF for a phase-out plan, declaring this protocol historic under the current proposed language, will do precisely that. Please please please, if IETF wants 6to4 to die, then publish a phase-out plan so that the current users of 6to4 can have fair warning before the relays go dark and forthcoming hardware/software upgrades rip the feature out from under them. -- james woodyatt <jhw@xxxxxxxxx> member of technical staff, core os networking _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf