On 04/12/2014 16:06, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Dec 3, 2014, at 12:04 PM, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> We have effectively gotten to the point of depletion of IPV4 addresses, and the world has not come to an end. I don't see any need to reclassify this RFC as a standard and think doing so would cause confusion in the community and be harmful to the Internet. > > If you think this shouldn't be a standard, why didn't you object when MAP-E, MAP-T and Lightweight 4over6 were last-called? I can't answer for Bob, but those documents were the result of a pretty laborious rough consensus process in Softwire and would have been very hard to challenge that consensus. Also, if I'm not mistaken, those solutions all explicitly involve transport of IPv4 via IPv6 (as does XLAT464); A+P is just orthgonal to IPv6. Brian