RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)

"Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net> Thu, 27 March 2003 23:51 UTC

Received: from ran.ietf.org (ran.ietf.org [10.27.6.60]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA26562; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 18:51:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordomo by ran.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 18yhML-0000Bz-00 for ietf-list@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:04:37 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([10.27.2.28] helo=ietf.org) by ran.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18yhKl-0008OC-00 for ietf@ran.ietf.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:02:59 -0500
Received: from tndh.net (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA26448 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 18:47:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eagleswings (127.0.0.1) by library with [XMail 1.10 (Win32/Ix86) ESMTP Server] id <S23397> for <ietf@ietf.org> from <alh-ietf@tndh.net>; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:49:52 -0800
Reply-To: alh-ietf@tndh.net
From: Tony Hain <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
To: 'Margaret Wasserman' <mrw@windriver.com>, 'Matt Crawford' <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Cc: 'Christian Huitema' <huitema@windows.microsoft.com>, 'The IETF' <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:49:51 -0800
Message-ID: <058201c2f4bb$8f94a3a0$ee1a4104@eagleswings>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030327164712.05210768@mail.windriver.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> No active IPv6 WG participant (whether or not he attends IETF
> meetings) could credibly claim that he was unaware that this 
> discussion was taking place,

The discussion has been about potential usage limitation, or BCP's
identifying application issues. The point of deprecation came out of
nowhere, and only occurred in the room in SF. This has not had valid
discussion.

Tony

>  or that he has been denied an 
> opportunity to voice his opinion on this subject (in-person, 
> on the mailing list, or both).  In fact, given the size and 
> scope of this discussion, there are probably very few IETF 
> participants who managed to miss the fact that this 
> discussion has been taking place.
> 
> If you would like to express your technical opinion on the 
> site-local issue, I would suggest that you take it to the 
> IPv6 WG mailing list. I would be happy to continue a 
> technical discussion with you on that list.
> 
> We will be publishing the minutes to the IPv6 meeting soon 
> and checking all of the consensus points reached during our 
> meetings on the IPv6 list shortly.  Your input is definitely welcome.
> 
> Margaret
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>