That's not to say the WG can't change its collective consensus at this point. But I don't think the previous discussion of deprecation was in any way dependent on devising an alternative solution.
- Ralph
At 11:06 AM 8/4/2003 -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
I would like to hear from the working group on how we should proceed. I think the choices are:
A) Deprecate Site-Local addresses independently from having an alternative solution available. This would mean that the working group should treat the deprecation, and requirements and solution documents outlined above independently from each other. If there was no consensus on an alternative a replacement would not happen.
B) Deprecate Site-Local addresses at the same time as a alternative solution is agreed to. This would mean advancing both documents at the same time and making them include normative references to each other to insure that they were published at the same time. This would result in the deprecation only happening if a consensus was reached on an alternative.
C) Deprecate Site-Local addresses after an alternative is defined, standardized, and in operational practice. This would mean not advancing a deprecation document until there was operational evidence that the alternative was working and shown to be an improvement over Site-Local addresses.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
