RE: Protocol Action: 'Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers' to Proposed Standard

["Dunn, Jeffrey H." <jdunn at mitre.org>]

Jari and Brian,

Would the 6man group consider an update to RFC 4291 that is contains
less prescriptive language? If so, I would be happy to undertake that
task.  Please let me know.

Best Regards, 
  
Jeffrey Dunn 
Info Systems Eng., Lead 
MITRE Corporation.
(301) 448-6965 (mobile)

-----Original Message-----
From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko at piuha.net] 
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2008 2:24 PM
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: Dunn, Jeffrey H.; Steve_Eiserman at ao.uscourts.gov; Internet
Architecture Board; 6man mailing list; IESG; RFC Editor
Subject: Re: Protocol Action: 'Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers' to
Proposed Standard

Brian, Jeffrey,

The picture and text that you quoted are in this RFC exactly as they
are 
in RFC 4291. We did get some feedback on that text during the last
call, 
but we decided that it would be confusing for this particular RFC to
say 
something else than RFC 4291. RFC 4291 is, after all, the currently 
approved addressing architecture document.

If we ever decide to make a change in the addressing architecture, we 
should issue an RFC 4291bis, not change the text in the various other 
RFCs that quote 4291 for some reason.

Jari

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