Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-11.txt

[joel jaeggli <[e-mail]>]

Thanks, looking forward to it.

joel

On 1/29/15 12:13 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
> Thanks much.
> 
> Folks - are we good with this? I’ll give people a few days to say otherwise, but plan to send it to Joel next week barring issues.
> 
>> On Jan 28, 2015, at 7:53 PM, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This version mainly has the "friendly amendments" suggested by David Farmer,
>> plus a few other changes from the last couple of weeks' discussion.
>>
>> Since the "Deprecation" section has been split and reorganized,
>> the diffs look a bit complex, but the changes are mainly editorial.
>>
>> Note to Ole: sorry, I'm on travel so submitted this without checking
>> with you.
>>
>> Note to Fred: I ran idnits and the resulting warnings can be safely
>> ignored.
>>
>> Note to everybody: if you feel you're missing from the Acknowledgments
>> please let me know.
>>
>> Regards
>>   Brian
>>
>> On 29/01/2015 16:46, [e-mail] wrote:
>>>
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF.
>>>
>>>        Title           : Deprecating Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers
>>>        Authors         : Ole Troan
>>>                          Brian Carpenter
>>> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-11.txt
>>> 	Pages           : 9
>>> 	Date            : 2015-01-28
>>>
>>> Abstract:
>>>   Experience with the "Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds
>>>   (6to4)" IPv6 transition mechanism defined in RFC 3056 has shown that
>>>   when used in its anycast mode, the mechanism is unsuitable for
>>>   widespread deployment and use in the Internet.  This document
>>>   therefore requests that RFC 3068, "An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay
>>>   Routers", be made obsolete and moved to historic status.  It also
>>>   obsoletes RFC 6732 "6to4 Provider Managed Tunnels".  It recommends
>>>   that future products should not support 6to4 anycast and that
>>>   existing deployments should be reviewed.  This complements the
>>>   guidelines in RFC 6343.
>>>
>>>
>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic/
>>>
>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-11
>>>
>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-11
>>>
>>>
>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>