[v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> Tue, 19 September 2017 12:24 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=1435462033=jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA0FB13421F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 05:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=jordi.palet@consulintel.es header.d=consulintel.es
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 jV8FlGFkErLN for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 05:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [217.126.185.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B41D13421C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 05:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1505823866; x=1506428666; q=dns/txt; h=DomainKey-Signature: Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:Message-ID:Thread-Topic: Mime-version:Content-type:Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; bh=lSJywgFF9Q5hzTbod/QuKFAgyD46Nm1lrLOMezMwZKU=; b=kpciw1HxZ3mw9 /hEk9os//hOh1lB98eDDYVTOPNBGHapvkzYbb/lMjEj81wcOenECoA2S27v/Cqh9 mmtuDz2VE3rwKFZ9pkGv4/wECn5u1YMbdHKj/Mq44jC7dD5NnYTErE1hZbXMhK6A bnl3JW5Lz65HSVKt7UP8SJfleeAWic=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=l+IBEsS2JkibROXH8hc8OViXD7/amvXoXR1sjW4ZrkmRSpquXYq6J36D7qlm 5mWgqB/MAmjGEoIUNfFUHJNIiuwtvFtdVI6qWqYAby2r02u6jr1sthu20 ScJadAgNIS5dHxw8cL7Ar9FcCgtz//hcDEDJawUjpfAtFcFwdLJKws=;
X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Tue, 19 Sep 2017 14:24:26 +0200
X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Tue, 19 Sep 2017 14:24:26 +0200
Received: from [100.124.9.206] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50005560063.msg for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Sep 2017 14:24:25 +0200
X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0)
X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-HashCash: 1:20:170919:md50005560063::ESnOgl0cgakmmkBe:00003zzX
X-Return-Path: prvs=1435462033=jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: v6ops@ietf.org
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.26.0.170902
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 09:23:52 -0300
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Message-ID: <C1017FAF-91C3-4CA3-89C2-B64FF5100E41@consulintel.es>
Thread-Topic: reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/HpDahlx9JCZIff4MRE2D13SJedM>
Subject: [v6ops] reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 12:24:57 -0000

Hi all,

RFC6877 (464XLAT) is an informational document.

However, this transition mechanism is the one that has a bigger deployment in terms of number of subscribers using it (hundreds of millions), which I think is even more than ALL the other transition mechanism together.

Doesn’t make any sense, in my opinion to keep it as an informational document, while we have many others that are standards track and don’t have such level of deployment.

I was commenting this last week with a couple of the co-authors of this document, and they have the same opinion.

So, should we aim to do this?

Can we even consider moving it to STD?

Regards,
Jordi
 



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.