On 3/15/16 10:15 AM, Alejandro Acosta wrote: > Hi Lee, > I read both, your blog post and your draft. > I believe this is a quite interesting idea, actually I support it but > my suggestion is to make (the whole draft) it more "IPv4 core" centric. > I mean, for example: > > "The IETF does not update Historic RFCs. Therefore, the IETF will no > longer work on IPv4 technologies, including transition technologies. > " > > I would remove transition technologies, also, as suggested by Marc, > more context around this text would be a good idea.
I have demonstrably less interest in transition technologies then I do in the continued function operation and maintenance of legacy ipv4 until such time as I not longer need it. which is not to say that transition technologies don't have glaring issues. many of them do. > Regards, > > Alejandro, > > > El 3/15/2016 a las 2:39 AM, Lee Howard escribió: >> As noted below, I’ve posted a draft. I thought I’d start a thread for >> discussing it. >> >> PLEASE Please please read the draft before commenting. It’s very >> short, less than 500 words, and I anticipate a lot of people having >> strong feelings about it. I would really rather not waste time arguing >> about things it doesn’t say. >> >> To that end, I’ve also written a blog post, explaining in a level of >> detail I thought inappropriate for the >> draft: >> <http://www.wleecoyote.com/blog/ipv4-historic.htm>http://www.wleecoyote.com/blog/ipv4-historic.htm >> >> Thank you, >> >> Lee >> >> From: sunset4 >> <<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> on behalf >> of Wesley George <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Date: Monday, March 14, 2016 at 6:28 PM >> To: "<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: [sunset4] Agenda items? >> >> As you can see, we have a meeting scheduled for BA. >> As of right now, we have a single agenda item: >> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-howard-sunset4-v4historic-00 >> >> While I fully expect that this item can expand to fill all >> available time, if there are other things that the WG wishes to >> discuss, please respond ASAP to request agenda time. >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Wes >> >> >> >> Anything below this line has been added by my company’s mail >> server, I have no control over it. >> >> ----------- >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner >> Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, >> or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This >> E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity >> to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of >> this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, >> distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents >> of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may >> be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please >> notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original >> and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. >> _______________________________________________ sunset4 mailing >> list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sunset4 mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 > > > > _______________________________________________ > sunset4 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4 >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ sunset4 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
