Re: [v6ops] draft-linkova-v6ops-nd-cache-init to working group draft

[Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 5:07 AM Fernando Gont <[e-mail]> wrote:

> My understanding is that, if anything, it is the relevant working groups
> that maintain and accept/reject errata, rather than their authors alone.
> (In fact, at the point the corresponding RFCs (at internet-draft stage)
> became wg items, they became adopted by the relevant wgs). That's why
> draft-ietf documents reflect the opinion of the relevant wg, rather than
> that of the authors.
>

The assertion from Warren was that an erratum would not be approved because
such an erratum would be clearly changing the intent of the original
document, making it say the opposite of what it used to say.

If a protocol needs to be updated, so be it. But that, I understand, is
> what 6man is for. I can see myself reasons for wanting to do it in
> v6ops. But unless I'm missing something, that's the charter of 6man,
> rather than of v6ops.
>

And it is in the charter of v6ops to suggest those modifications:

======
1. Solicit input from network operators and users to identify
operational issues with IPv6 networks, and determine solutions or
workarounds to those issues.
...
IPv6 operational and deployment issues with specific protocols [...]
are the primary responsibility of
the groups or areas responsible for those protocols [...]
However, the v6ops Working Group may provide input to
those areas/groups, as needed, and cooperate with those areas/groups in
reviewing solutions to IPv6 operational and deployment problems.
======

This is an operational issue in IPv6-only networks, and this draft is about
determining a solution and providing 6man with input on how to resolve it
in the protocol.