In message <4e2f4491.30...@gmail.com>, Brian E Carpenter writes: > Alex, > > Since 6to4 is a transition mechanism it has no long term future > *by definition*. Even if someone chooses to design a v2, who is going to > implement it? > > If you have a reason to install and enable 6to4, why would the nominal > status of a couple of RFCs make you do anything different? > > Of course, if implementors choose to drop the code you might not be > able to upgrade software versions - but hopefully by that time you > will have native IPv6 service anyway.
Which is exactly why HISTORIC is NOT appropriate. > Regards > Brian Carpenter -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
