IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sunset4] Closing Sunset4

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Tue, 15 May 2018 05:29 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087D21275F4 for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 May 2018 22:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
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 6LNGVV5jMgTy for <sunset4@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 May 2018 22:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (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 B20A31200C1 for <sunset4@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 May 2018 22:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 50005B0; Tue, 15 May 2018 07:29:23 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1526362163; bh=pYhpOTaLNDY/JG6VfbwRYR2nVPCX8ZT/CYdN1slfklQ=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=bzs+mrXj3/ercE44pt3rt5boEodNwJIJUjSWORvSAJPN8XvwowPS23SAtEDL5VhKX tCAtEse7l4tKWs08AXIh+rxJgeKs2iiEggPRNLD7JQvSu0rRd8c4dfdlI1IhbAOsde tDu9JlprT+hpL9Bmc0m/5kFCQS/TZb4IHxMtc/dE=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A156AF; Tue, 15 May 2018 07:29:23 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:29:23 +0200
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Terry Manderson <terry.manderson@icann.org>
cc: "sunset4@ietf.org" <sunset4@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <756C7AEB-B6B1-4034-BFFF-AC02D2DE452C@icann.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1805150724290.17103@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <756C7AEB-B6B1-4034-BFFF-AC02D2DE452C@icann.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sunset4/m_62P3NYqm_G2OmHAcRXOF0hVa4>
Subject: Re: [sunset4] Closing Sunset4
X-BeenThere: sunset4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: sunset4 working group discussion list <sunset4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sunset4/>
List-Post: <mailto:sunset4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4>, <mailto:sunset4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 05:29:26 -0000

On Tue, 15 May 2018, Terry Manderson wrote:

> different charter specifically for that item. It has also been made 
> quite clear with the discussions surrounding the last Sunset4 WG item 
> that the IETF and the internet industry are simply not ready to change 
> the status of IPv4 while, in reality, the move to IPv6 (only) will be a 
> very long-tailed exercise.

When MIF was closed, work was directed to another working group.

I'd like to see similar guidance for the closing of this WG. There is 
still work to be done, for instance the discussions in v6ops/6man on an 
"no-v4-here"-flag is quite obvious fit there, but other 
discussions/guidance on how to behave when there seems to be no IPv4 
around, where should this take place? For instance discussions on backoff 
timers for DHCPv4 / DNSSD v4 usage in the abscence of no automatic v4 seen 
when connecting?

I can understand that the discussions we've had are not enough to warrant 
a WG, but it doesn't mean there are no discussions at all. It would be 
good if they had a home.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email