Hi,
On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:41:49PM -0400, TJ wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 13:22, Keith Moore <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > I strongly object to the proposed reclassification of these documents as
> > Historic.
> > *<snipped lots of great thoughts/comments, solely for brevity>*
>
> Agreed that this is too harsh, too soon. Fixing the broken implementations
> is a better idea than trying to break the working ones. And I am not just
> saying this because I successfully use 6to4 on a fairly common basis ...
Do we really need to go through all this again?
As long as there is no Internet Overlord that can command people to
a) put up relays everywhere and b) ensure that these relays are working,
6to4 as a general mechanism for attachment to the IPv6 Internet is FAIL.
If someone wants to use 6to4 to interconnect his machines over an IPv4
infrastructure (=6to4 on both ends), nobody is taking this away.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
