[130856] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Choice of network space when numbering interfaces with IPv6 (IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Sun Oct 17 11:01:02 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikMPJT3XE745aH5hE3gdNyrfLUGcjh=+FpW8s41@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 07:56:40 -0700
To: Bill Bogstad <bogstad@pobox.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 16, 2010, at 4:52 PM, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Kevin Oberman <oberman@es.net> wrote:
>>> Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 00:40:41 +1030
>>> From: Mark Smith =
<nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org>
>>>=20
>>> On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:31:22 +0100
>>> Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> =
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-6man-prefixlen-p2p-00.txt
>>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Drafts are drafts, and nothing more, aren't they?
>>=20
>> Drafts are drafts. Even most RFCs are RFCs and nothing more. Only a
>> handful have ever been designated as "Standards". I hope this becomes
>> one of those in the hope it will be taken seriously. (It already is =
by
>> anyone with a large network running IPv6.)
>=20
> And none of the listed IETF "full standards" are IPv6 related. That
> seems a little bit odd to me given that everyone is supposed to have
> implemented them by now.
>=20
> Bill Bogstad
IPv4 was much further along in deployment than IPv6 is now when the =
first
IPv4 STDs were published as STDs.
Usually RFCs bake for quite a while in the real world before becoming =
STDs.
Owen
