-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
> I couldn't agree more with Anton. Once you implement OSPFv3, you can > bring it forward as an experimental RFC and specify it completely (not > just the few reserved bits as we have today). > > Also, I don't think the prospect of something that someone might > implement or even intends to implement is enough to influence the > standard. The original OSPFv3 document has been around since 1999 so > there has been an ample gestation period for MOSPFv3 implementations. I would support this action, as well.... It's fine to remove it for the moment, and if someone comes forward with a full implementation, then we can consider making it a separate document. This isn't about deprecating it, just separating it, so the other docs can be simplified somewhat, and removing the partial stuff out of the docs. :-) Russ - -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] CCIE <>< Grace Alone -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGt6KRER27sUhU9OQRAuXvAKCxK2wpeGc0RLuOFKq95pfZbOrCcwCg/DqU VC2vNqtq1RSJ6t05sJ7RReU= =sMVJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
