Le 27 juil. 2011 à 08:10, Tore Anderson a écrit : > * Ronald Bonica > >> 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. > > I support this approach. Suggestion to make the two RFC Experimental has been made, and received some support. I haven't seen objections tho this compromise approach. Are there some? RD > > Best regards, > -- > Tore Anderson > Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf