* Ronald Bonica

> After some discussion, the IESG is attempting to determine whether there is 
> IETF consensus to do the following:
> 
> - add a new section to draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic
> - publish draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic as INFORMATIONAL
> 
> draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic will obsolete RFCs 3056 and 3068 and 
> convert their status to HISTORIC. It will also contain a new section 
> describing what it means for RFCs 3056 and 3068 to be classified as HISTORIC. 
> The new section will say that:
> 
> - 6-to-4 should not be configured by default on any implementation (hosts, 
> cpe routers, other)
> - vendors will decide whether/when 6-to-4 will be removed from 
> implementations. Likewise, operators will decide whether/when 6-to-4 relays 
> will be removed from their networks. The status of RFCs 3056 and 3068 should 
> not be interpreted as a recommendation to remove 6-to-4 at any particular 
> time.
> 
> 
> draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic will not update RFC 2026. While it 
> clarifies the meaning of "HISTORIC" in this particular case, it does not set 
> a precedent for any future case.

I support this approach.

Best regards,
-- 
Tore Anderson
Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to