IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Mon, 14 April 2014 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76A841A022D for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:07:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 APGUr34ECSZf for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C53111A0224 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Envelope-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from cupcake.foobar.org ([IPv6:2001:4d68:2002:100::110]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.14.8/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s3EL73vo079794 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:07:04 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.netability.ie: Host [IPv6:2001:4d68:2002:100::110] claimed to be cupcake.foobar.org
Message-ID: <534C4DF7.4070407@foobar.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 22:07:03 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
References: <534BF5A5.5010609@viagenie.ca> <534BFA08.3030404@foobar.org> <49EA8AC9-D5C5-4FE5-9A10-0CD574782F0F@nominum.com> <534C07FC.8000907@foobar.org> <F08AF14D-22C6-4F4C-9388-670EB4CD8453@nominum.com> <F2A0EC2F-6B41-4560-88BA-CEBF3E921B61@delong.com> <CAEmG1=oK8iHAms2_uVBsCtpCG7xBdhRfh9QQrd+JXUXgjBPqPA@mail.gmail.com> <0901D65B-EA79-4E20-987D-9BA01CEDDAB3@delong.com> <B3942C2F-C08E-42F2-9038-92C3C63E0023@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <B3942C2F-C08E-42F2-9038-92C3C63E0023@nominum.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/EjnEckv_EsRvSKlWtdsBXuSbXpk
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 21:07:14 -0000

On 14/04/2014 20:42, Ted Lemon wrote:
> The working group considered doing it that other way and decided that on
> the balance, the way it's written now is better.

Ted, there seems to have been relatively little discussion about this
point.  There's nothing in any of the sunset4 mailing lists, and the only
reference I can find to not using dhcpv4 for this purpose were the
presentation and minutes at ietf84, neither of which devoted much attention
to the problem, as far as I can see.

> https://tools.ietf.org/agenda/84/slides/slides-84-sunset4-9.pdf
> https://tools.ietf.org/wg/sunset4/minutes?item=minutes-84-sunset4.html

I may be missing something though.

Nick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email