This discussion is not about being police and mandate people do things,
but about showing the example within our bounds so other people can see
that and do themselves as well .
Otherwise people may look and think: "If not even IETF is bothered about
using products that have full IPv6 support, why should I bother ?"
Regards
Fernando
On 22/04/2020 10:46, Salz, Rich wrote:
No, we should make it mandatory. There is no path forward using IPv4.
It is a dead end.
"We're not the protocol police." Except this one hobby-horse that some have.
Mandatory IPv6 to disenfranchise those that have only IPv4 and find it works fine? Balkanization?
