Le 27 juil. 2011 à 08:10, Tore Anderson a écrit :

> * 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.

Suggestion to make the two RFC Experimental has been made, and received some 
support.
I haven't seen objections tho this compromise approach.
Are there some?

RD

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


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to