John - I should have been more careful in my use of "we", which I had intended to mean the IETF as a whole. I agree that the issue of "implemented and interoperable" is not within the IPv6 WG's scope. It wouldn't hurt for the WG to be aware of the potential issues and come to an explciit decision about how to proceed within the context of past practice and documented requirements.
- Ralph
At 03:41 PM 4/27/2004 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Ralph,
> I also agree that we should be more precise in our acceptance of > "implemented and interoperable". I fear that the current practice can be > (and has been) applied selectively to allow advancement of some standards > while holding back others.
I'm not sure that your point above is something that is within the IPv6 WGs scope. Perhaps this needs to be taken up with the IESG or elsewhere.
John
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
