[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Requirements for Limited-Scope Unicast Addressing in IPv6


>> Michel Py wrote:
>> We don't throw away a published standard with running code
>> from multiple vendors in exchange for the promise that
>> _maybe_ someone will be able to produce a replacement that
>> meets the requirements.

> Eliot Lear wrote:
> It is true that we should not make standards where there is no
> running code.  However, Running code != good practices or even
> good ideas.  And we do have running code (with both good and
> bad ideas) for now while we figure out this question- it's
> called IPv4.

I will remind you that the official IETF position is that IPv6 is in
production, which led to the creation of the v6ops WG. IPv6 is no longer
a prototype we can tinker with. Or maybe you recommend a gracious


IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com