IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: RFC 6346 successful: moving to Proposed Standard

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 04 December 2014 03:07 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AF901A701D; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 19:07:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 ACIVoKXFwSVi; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 19:07:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 390C91A1B95; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 19:07:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FACCDA0142; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 03:06:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E01853E076; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 19:06:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.20.107] (71.233.43.215) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Wed, 3 Dec 2014 19:06:42 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: RFC 6346 successful: moving to Proposed Standard
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <A4CFF3FB-A9C5-47EA-A1CA-B900CDBF776E@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 22:06:37 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <87498266-8A59-40F8-B987-D51D9828BB33@nominum.com>
References: <20141201223832.20448.34524.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <A4CFF3FB-A9C5-47EA-A1CA-B900CDBF776E@gmail.com>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.43.215]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/xM54AACNFvBz9raTScmoDU_XLNM
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 03:07:21 -0000

On Dec 3, 2014, at 12:04 PM, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:
> We have effectively gotten to the point of depletion of IPV4 addresses, and the world has not come to an end.  I don't see any need to reclassify this RFC as a standard and think doing so would cause confusion in the community and be harmful to the Internet.

If you think this shouldn't be a standard, why didn't you object when MAP-E, MAP-T and Lightweight 4over6 were last-called?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email