IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Wed, 27 July 2011 17:07 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3314421F8C0A; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:07:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.376
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.376 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.227, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DapZ4EfOBSG6; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9007121F8C02; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [130.129.19.44] (dhcp-132c.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.19.44]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 207BB1D2C37C; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 13:07:46 -0400 (EDT)
References: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D3F431D11F@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <4E2DE4EC.1030109@gmail.com> <4E2E2FBA.1030304@gmail.com> <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D3F44833C5@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <4E2EDF23.3060804@gmail.com> <4E2F4491.30102@gmail.com> <72A76FC2-CA5F-4DD5-91FF-280B6A42268B@cisco.com> <39EEA819-6D8D-4FE7-958D-D7DCEDF893C1@townsley.net>
In-Reply-To: <39EEA819-6D8D-4FE7-958D-D7DCEDF893C1@townsley.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8J2)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-Id: <315867B5-EE5F-4440-999D-5E4253A68C2D@lucidvision.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8J2)
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] 6to4v2 (as in ripv2)?
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 13:08:09 -0400
To: Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net>
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:07:47 -0000

On Jul 27, 2011, at 7:31 AM, Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net> wrote:

> 
> On Jul 27, 2011, at 7:09 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jul 26, 2011, at 6:49 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> 
>>> Since 6to4 is a transition mechanism it has no long term future *by definition*. Even if someone chooses to design a v2, who is going to implement it?
>> 
>> Actually, I think one could argue pretty effectively that 6rd is 6to4-bis. 
> 
> +1
> 
> - Mark

+2


> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email