Re: [rfc2462bis] whether we need the M/O flags

[JINMEI Tatuya / $B?@L at C#:H(B <jinmei at isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp>]

>>>>> On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 22:28:05 -0700, 
>>>>> Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM> said:

> My biggest question is: can we recycle rfc2462bis as DS despite fact
> 3?

> I failed to see what is wrong with the unused feature elimination
> Christian described
> when moving along the standard track.

Not sure if you're making an objection to what I said, so please let
me clarify my point.

I would first like to be sure if it is okay to recycle the document as
DS even with the lack of implementation on a part of the protocol
description (in this case, the receiving side of the M flag),
*process-wise*.

If it's not okay, all the discussion we are having is meaningless;
Regardless of whether we prefer the idea of deprecating the flag, or
whether what Christian said is valid or not, we have no other choice
than deprecating/removing the feature (though there may be some
compromise on the details of "deprecate").

If it's okay, then we can continue the discussion.

I've been asking for an answer (if any), not an opinion, from someone
very familiar to the standardization process, but unfortunately, I've
never seen an answer.  The wg chairs are probably the "someone", but
as I pointed out, their answer based on incorrect information.  Thus,
I first corrected the information and then asked the same question.

					JINMEI, Tatuya
					Communication Platform Lab.
					Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
					jinmei@isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------