Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 06:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bill Manning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| what an odd point of view. if, as is asserted, the IPv6
| is "production" then why are we still seeing drafts
| changing the address format?
That would be an odd definition of "production" - if that were how
it were defined, then IPv4 couldn't have been "production" in 1989
when class D addresses were defined (RFC1112) and the IPv4 address
format thus altered.
Aside from that, anyone can submit drafts about anything, anytime.
Even a WG accepting a draft (forwarding it to the IESG) changes nothing.
The IETF must agree to accept the change before any alterations happen,
and none of that has occurred here.
kre
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
