Jari and Brian, Would the 6man group consider an update to RFC 4291 that is contains less prescriptive language? If so, I would be happy to undertake that task. Please let me know.
Best Regards, Jeffrey Dunn Info Systems Eng., Lead MITRE Corporation. (301) 448-6965 (mobile) -----Original Message----- From: Jari Arkko [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 2:24 PM To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: Dunn, Jeffrey H.; [email protected]; Internet Architecture Board; 6man mailing list; IESG; RFC Editor Subject: Re: Protocol Action: 'Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers' to Proposed Standard Brian, Jeffrey, The picture and text that you quoted are in this RFC exactly as they are in RFC 4291. We did get some feedback on that text during the last call, but we decided that it would be confusing for this particular RFC to say something else than RFC 4291. RFC 4291 is, after all, the currently approved addressing architecture document. If we ever decide to make a change in the addressing architecture, we should issue an RFC 4291bis, not change the text in the various other RFCs that quote 4291 for some reason. Jari -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
