IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic WGLC

James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com> Wed, 21 January 2015 19:47 UTC

Return-Path: <jhw@nestlabs.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 AFE121A872A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 pxLxbySaYfHn for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-f53.google.com (mail-oi0-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 736251A871E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f53.google.com with SMTP id i138so8647524oig.12 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=MbsgNGh8Tl4ki4CmmU3eTQEufwP6Lb3fgAgZYW8XQA8=; b=AB6faxT7C1o1FYvDiiDnVjrJQm4JG2Gr2QgJODt1DEsHOlPELhsjwxKdcGumKypWR4 aHrPgMCdV1rglaoFOJoI2Sj2K1+GphysUQD/jErv9v4QAQsCuwdu8YymReVNE80y97f3 a3eezD9mkQa37NMv9snnnbfX+dzwMLSc9yjOYooXplaN6hat/rOVQsUCyCaNIstqzwmT YV7SoKbk3WLuKwrnXweohZ6varywJElExUfGd0NXbKztQs9FRiBzy6BwA52yFL3xSEbL +kUxYfTjGNnpOZnh6JUZihzmck3SnpWef1V8GdZ5/PkBJDsxCZYxOMtv0gH9Vc/cLc80 hJ/Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn/78gDH94yhmVsfwR6m2AnUgO1z+KNvn91w+lM+g9NallxHWS++w4QVVmB2m25Hlih2ds0
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.44.132 with SMTP id e4mr26336449obm.86.1421869643769; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.76.150.2 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:23 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr1Ec7=g5VNZtbBw6Tutr2oi-1_SmcEJu_JCDKUvSGsAUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <54BEB741.8060709@gmail.com> <248188907.4210717.1421800222689.JavaMail.yahoo@jws106136.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <CAKD1Yr1Ec7=g5VNZtbBw6Tutr2oi-1_SmcEJu_JCDKUvSGsAUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:23 -0800
Message-ID: <CADhXe51h1ERcq8i=JJNX0PLwZ6Mb7Quw0W53K7fAP4omVioD7w@mail.gmail.com>
From: James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com>
To: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2f49a08c030050d2ed33b"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/mcZi7MWquq4I1DZ55WBtxGbQs1U>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic WGLC
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, 21 Jan 2015 19:47:25 -0000

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 4:16 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:

>
>    1. Is it necessary to formally deprecate RFC 6732? It's an individual
>    submission. (Not that I support RFC 6732 in any way, to be sure.)
>
> Rather than ask if it's necessary, I'd prefer to ask if there is any sane
reason to think RFC 6732 is anything more than an historical curiosity.

If 6to4-PMT isn't of any more than historical interest, then let's please
move its category to Historic so that its applicability will not be
confused with other practical non-standard protocol specifications
published by IETF in the Informational category, many of which rightly
enjoy widespread deployment today, e.g. PPPoE.


-- 
james woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com>
Nest Labs, Communications Engineering

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email