Re: Standard status of RFC 3879

reference, but also restates the action taken by RFC 3879.  Assuming RFC 
4291 progresses along the standards track making the deprecation of 
Site-local a "standard" is there any need to also promote 3879?   Also, 
since 4291 obsoletes 3351, the definition of site-local address is 
effectively erased, as if it never existed, although the text does not 
say MUST NOT, and allows for the use of site-local by preexisting 
implementations.

In the latest version of the US DoD IPv6 profiles, RFC 3879 is mentioned 
only as a footnote because RFC 4291 appears to be definitive enough.

Bob Hinden wrote:
> Christian,
>
>> RFC 3879 was published as proposed standard about 5 years ago. Do we 
>> intend to leave it at that stage, or to update its status along the 
>> standard track?
>>
>
> What did you have in mind?  Is there a reason to advance it?
>
> Bob
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>

-- 
Ed Jankiewicz - SRI International
Fort Monmouth Branch Office - IPv6 Research 
Supporting DISA Standards Engineering Branch
732-389-1003 or  ed.jankiewicz@sri.com 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------