On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Keith Moore <[email protected]>wrote:
> > 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. > > Even if there was rough consensus within v6ops, rough consensus of v6ops > does not equate to rough consensus of the entire IETF community. > And who says that "rough consensus of the entire IETF community" is that this draft should not be published? Were there public discussions to that effect that came to this conclusion?
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
