On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> But since nobody seemed to care for the last 14 years
this is false. some people have been fighting this for 20 years.
though the first years were more concentrated on fighting the TLS/NLA
insanity, which makes this /64 mess look minor. for those of us trying
to deal with classful ipv6 for the last 20 years, this /64 issue is the
last clean-up.
The original message in the thread about this draft:
" > The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Maintenance WG (6man) to
" > The IESG has received a request from the IPv6 Maintenance WG (6man) to
> consider the following document:
> - 'IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture'
> <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> as Internet Standard
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2017-03-01. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting."
Nothing in the past really matters here, what matters is: "Is the bis draft all set, did we fix all the things which must be fixed before this draft becomes a real 'standard'?"
"no, I don't think we did" - randy (as strawman arguer)
Folk's frustrations are coming out, deep breath and think before 'send' please... we're all really trying to do the right thing, yes?