IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: A6 record status

Jiangsheng <jiangsheng@huawei.com> Fri, 12 August 2011 00:56 UTC

Return-Path: <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17C7621F8B15 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:56:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.388, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 88cM4B7ramDP for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:56:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66E6021F8B14 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:56:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga05-in [172.24.2.49]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LPS008Y7INHAX@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for ipv6@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:57:17 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LPS00AX3ING7O@szxga05-in.huawei.com> for ipv6@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:57:17 +0800 (CST)
Received: from 172.24.2.119 (EHLO szxeml207-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ADC89820; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:57:16 +0800 (CST)
Received: from SZXEML411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.138) by szxeml207-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:57:10 +0800
Received: from SZXEML506-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.17]) by szxeml411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.138]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Fri, 12 Aug 2011 08:57:15 +0800
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:57:13 +0000
From: Jiangsheng <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
Subject: RE: A6 record status
In-reply-to: <4E445261.3040506@gmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [10.110.98.152]
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 6man <ipv6@ietf.org>
Message-id: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B920122BB38@SZXEML506-MBS.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-language: zh-CN
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US
Thread-topic: A6 record status
Thread-index: AQHMWHLrmIDSjNWJLka/OSinMjVthZUYY04w
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
References: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9201228398@SZXEML506-MBS.china.huawei.com> <4E3F5166.8000605@gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B9201228515@SZXEML506-MBS.china.huawei.com> <750E838E-3962-4893-A2D0-012576A1BF36@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|7906899305f1bb5341fe3f32269a1f49n779ac03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|750E838E-3962-4893-A2D0-012576A1BF36@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <4E406303.4040603@gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B920122B288@SZXEML506-MBS.china.huawei.com> <4E43378D.8070505@gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B920122B2E1@SZXEML506-MBS.china.huawei.com> <4E4345BB.5060103@gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B920122B36A@SZXEML506-MBS.china.huawei.com> <4E445261.3040506@gmail.com>
Cc: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:56:48 -0000

+1

When we did 6renum current practise analysis, we found A6 record is helpful in renumbering cases. However, we then found it has many issues, which has been documented in RFC 3363 and RFC 3364. If A6 stays experimental status, it is really misleading. We should avoid this confusion by moving it to Historic.

Sheng 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 6:06 AM
> To: 6man
> Cc: Jiangsheng; Tim Chown
> Subject: A6 record status
> 
> Hi,
> 
> What do 6man people think about moving RFC 2874 (the A6 record)
> from Experimental to Historic status?
> 
> It's pretty clear that it doesn't have any real value, and
> it can still create confusion for newcomers.
> 
> IMHO this doesn't need a draft; the IESG could just do it.
> 
> Regards
>    Brian Carpenter

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email