> And finally, a silly question: if they do not have any difference, > why can't RH/HAO as well be considered the generic approach usable also > elsewhere?
Deserves a silly answer. Yes, we should get IPsec to stop using IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling and instead use RH/HAO, and we'll move RFC 2473 to historic :-) One of the disadvantages of working on a draft for 5-6 years is that the world might have changed around you. Assuming that the new world will take one step back, one to the side, and one step forward to use the new approach about to become a proposed standard when there already is a well-understood and deployed mechanism seems a bit odd to me. Erik -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
