Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Wed, 30 April 2014 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
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 B5B2C1A0776 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 Mjyg3RPbpT66 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D9061A04E8 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCD0B1B803C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8CA319005C; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:31:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:31:59 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <5361387A.5070805@dougbarton.us>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:31:55 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <B9330EEC-4B3C-42FE-BF28-B65F880036A5@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> <5360B37B.8010908@dougbarton.us> <F350FDDA-645B-42B3-90EB-70D8852E8435@nominum.com> <5361387A.5070805@dougbarton.us>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/JDHMo7wkVfGepodD4ffn19AAar8
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: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:32:02 -0000

On Apr 30, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote:
> I'm not sure why you would say that, or why you would snip one phrase out of my entire e-mail to respond to and ignore all of the other arguments I made about why this draft is a bad idea.

The less said on this long, repetitive thread, the better.   The particular point I quoted was refuted early on and is utterly absurd.   Your other points have been addressed.   Please, can we stop talking about this and wait for the next version to be published?