Bill, Bill Manning wrote: > > % On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > % > Thoughts? > % Been there, done that, gotten flamed about it :-). > > Not flamed, simply pointed out that this was the method > used and documented for preliminary IPv6 address delegations ... > before the creation of the 6bone. The expectation was/is that > the RIRs should be setting prefix delegation policies and > the IETF should work on protocols.
However, that expectation applies to stable, well understood technology. It seems entirely possible that multi6 will come up with a direction that would require some new thinking, and the initial technical discussion of that would belong in the IETF (as was the case for CIDR). But that discussion doesn't belong on this list, and doesn't belong on the multi6 list either, until we have made some architectural progress there. So I think we should just leave it for now... > > % > % draft-savola-multi6-asn-pi-01.txt > % (Well, I don't like that proposition either..) > % p.s. the correct forum may be multi6. > > Actually, the correct forum would be the RIR public policy mtgs. Not yet IMHO, see above. Brian > > --bill > Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and > certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise). > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brian E Carpenter Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
