> I agree with Michel. Although Thomas is logically correct, > I think that including section 2.0 and putting this on > standards track is a necessary signal to ensure that TLAs > are really understood to be dead.
Let me ask a pragmatic question. If this document goes on standards track, how will this document advance up the Standards Track? What will the implementation reports contain and actually test? I don't see immediately anything that is testable. This is one of the reasons I don't see Standards Track is being the right classification. > I also think the explicit reference to 2000::/3 is useful. > It's the only space currently being allocated. I'm not sure what this means. If we want to say only 2000::/3 is currently allocated, that might be fine. But the current document doesn't say that (indeed, it says nothing about what has and has not been allocated). Instead, it talks about formats. And why aren't the words in addr-arch good enough about the 2000::/3 allocation? Thomas -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
