>but I keep hearing from the KAME folks again and again
>"we already have IPv6 implementations which do not understand
>HAO, we dont want HAO mandated" (which makes no sense to me).
MUST for HAO is self-contradictory at best. if HAO is a MUST, we don't
need bidir-tunnel (since it won't be used). if we have bidir-tunnel,
HAO is okay with SHOULD.
i don't want a pie-throwing match, but it seems that you want it...
i keep hearing from you "we can ignore currently-deployed IPv6
codebase" which is total nonsense (or total ignorance of the current
situation) to me. IPv6 is not a toy in your lab any more. we have
people depend on it, we have serious IPv6 commercial network operation.
i suggest to leave the SHOULD/MUST decision to jari, the main editor.
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
