> |SHIM6 is in development, so I don't think it's ever been > |recommended yet, > |and anyway it's not the RRG's job to decide. > > I distinctly recall it being recommended at a NANOG long ago and the ensuing > broohaha.
Do you mean shim6 was recommended at a NANOG? I don't
remember that, so can you be more specific? I don't
remember what "broohaha" you're talking about either, so
more specificity on that would be helpful as well.
That said, there was a flurry of activity in various
operator fora (RIPE, NANOG, APRICOT) in the 2006-2007
timeframe (for what should be obvious reasons). See
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog35/agenda.php or
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog37/agenda.php for
example.
In addition, for those interested in understanding why
operators have been/are concerned, I highly recommend
http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog35/presentations/schiller.pdf
as a place to start.
Dave
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
