Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-troan-v6ops-6to4-update

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On Aug 12, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Philip Homburg wrote:

> In your letter dated Thu, 11 Aug 2011 06:55:01 -0700 (PDT) you wrote:
>> A new draft has been posted, at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-v6ops-6
>> to4-update. Please take a look at it and comment.
> 
> I guess it can't hurt to say that 6to4 must be off by default.
> 
> Then the draft proceeds to disucss address selection. And that's a bit 
> curious. The text there is already covered by 3484bis. But the draft is
> strangely silent about whether to prefer an IPv4 connection over a 
> connection between two 6to4 addresses. (This is also covered in 3484bis,
> so that text should at least refer to 3484bis)

My impression from what I heard in Quebec City is that 3484-revise might still take a while to get through the 6man WG, and it seems that many people want an RFC that "updates" 6to4 to be issued as quickly as possible.  If 3484-revise were approved before -update is submitted, I agree that an explicit reference to 3484bis in -update would be appropriate. 

Keith