IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Topic IPv6

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Tue, 22 November 2016 20:23 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 6F9F8129B3D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:23:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xjO6lr0kVGfZ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:23:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEA3C129B2B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:23:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D4772CCE7; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 22:23:48 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RidJKmkqimqb; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 22:23:47 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9096F2CC95; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 22:23:47 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
Subject: Re: Topic IPv6
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2BEC568E-DE9C-4E5B-A82C-FE3BBA754DC1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <173a46ff-5dba-3dd5-85d8-eb69b9c25cd3@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 22:23:46 +0200
Message-Id: <22765E98-302D-4CDE-8CC6-03194C0E9B8C@piuha.net>
References: <CAGxDXJ9L-Zfu+Wn8MogOn_yKgDKKuUVyqNp5mxNYaJZd-371qA@mail.gmail.com> <20161121135800.hj773gvjquay7ka5@nic.fr> <CAGxDXJ_j+U2yngKPqK+ciHSG9B2CsTRYPq8swqbVZZBOfYB37Q@mail.gmail.com> <20161121145039.p56dd5cpczxaivyl@nic.fr> <CAGxDXJ_zAXt_QD8vpW29vShV1enXewQ1sshZfOQd+WMU17=DTA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGxDXJ-Hkvfh=E_C8ReqBE-LoN+cRR9g5d=ZnusapoNSw3i8yQ@mail.gmail.com> <04c201d24434$2329dd20$697d9760$@tndh.net> <alpine.LRH.2.00.1611211520170.27805@post.law.miami.edu> <173a46ff-5dba-3dd5-85d8-eb69b9c25cd3@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/hTX7jgBFJBt9GfkGCrQtmnZvfF0>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 20:23:51 -0000

>> Is that now the rule?  Have RFCs 1984 & 2804 been superseded?
> 
> Those RFCs were very carefully drafted to be based on technical issues
> concerned with security. It's true that they have implications for
> policy makers, and that they are inconvenient for policy makers who
> prefer to deny technical reality.

+1 to what Brian says above.

Jari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email