On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Ronald Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net> wrote:
> - In order for the new draft to be published, it must achieve both V6OPS WG > and IETF consensus > > If anyone objects to this course of action, please speak up soon. > Great, back to square one. Is the reasoning behind the decision explained somewhere? My reading of the threads on the subject in v6ops was that the opposition to 6to4-historic was a small but vocal minority, and I thought that qualified as rough consensus. But perhaps I missed some discussion. Also, why do the author and the chairs think that the new draft will do any better than 6to4-historic? I would assume that the same people who spoke up against 6to4-historic will speak up against the new document, and since that level of opposition was sufficient to prevent the publication of 6to4-historic, it may be sufficient to prevent publication of the new document as well. If so, we will have spent 3-6 months arguing about it for naught. Please, nobody answer this question with "welcome to the IETF" :-)
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
