Hi - > From: "Mykyta Yevstifeyev" <evniki...@gmail.com> > To: <ietf@ietf.org> > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 3:16 AM > Subject: Historic status (was Another look at 6to4 (and other IPv6 > transitionissues)) ... > And what could/should be done? I think, IESG and the whole community, > cooperating with IAB, IRSG and ISE, should determine the definition of > Historic which will be fine enough to cover all existing issues with it, > and then either publish such approach as BCP or incorporate when > updating RFC 2026. This will eliminate the problems with different > issues with procedures for and understanding of Historic RFCs as well as > clear up one of "dark places" in IETF process. ...
After universal IPv6 deployment has been achieved, after we have workable standardized configuration management, after all significant protocols have been properly secured, and after NAT has been banished from this planet, I *might* be persuaded to support spending time on this. Randy _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
