Subject: Re: [v6ops] 6to4v2 (as in ripv2)?

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 12:14:45 -0400 (EDT)

> From: Philip Homburg <[email-masked]>

    > I think it would be quite weird to keep 6to4 at standards track just to
    > prevent some vendors from dropping 6to4 support.

There have been suggestions that it might be more appropriate to reclassify
it as Experimental, and I think that makes a lot of sense - as you correctly
(IMO) point out, due to its issues 6to4 is not really appropriate for
standards track (at least, in its current form).

	Noel

---

From: Rémi Després <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:19:43 +0200

+1

IMHO, it does make a lot of sense.
(I made a similar comment before reading this one)-.

Regards,
RD

Le 27 juil. 2011 à 18:14, Noel Chiappa a écrit :

> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf