Re: [sunset4] s'wonderful or not, Last Call: <draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf-01.txt> (IETF: End Work on IPv4) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: "John Levine" <johnl@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [sunset4] s'wonderful or not, Last Call: <draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf-01.txt> (IETF: End Work on IPv4) to Proposed Standard
From: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 07:35:01 +0900
Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20171001043013.39150.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <9637bbf6-82a2-c94d-0b3d-238501e7679a@gmail.com> <20171001043013.39150.qmail@ary.lan>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.2 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)

> The bit about not adding anything to IPv4 unless we also add it to
> IPv6 is OK

is it retroactive?  ops have been asking for functional parity for a
couple of decades.

randy

References:
- Re: [sunset4] Last Call: <draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf-01.txt> (IETF: End Work on IPv4) to Proposed Standard
  - From: Stewart Bryant
- Re: [sunset4] s'wonderful or not, Last Call: <draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf-01.txt> (IETF: End Work on IPv4) to Proposed Standard
  - From: John Levine

Prev by Date: Re: [Teas] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-06
Next by Date: Fwd: Re: WG Review: IDentity Enabled Networks (ideas)
Previous by thread: Re: [sunset4] s'wonderful or not, Last Call: <draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf-01.txt> (IETF: End Work on IPv4) to Proposed Standard
Next by thread: Re: [sunset4] s'wonderful or not, Last Call: <draft-ietf-sunset4-ipv6-ietf-01.txt> (IETF: End Work on IPv4) to Proposed Standard
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [IETF Annoucements] [IETF] [IP Storage] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCTP] [Linux Newbies] [Fedora Users]