RE: Experimental status of RFC 4389? ND Proxy

[Dave Thaler <dthaler at windows.microsoft.com>]

Primarily because it still required work on SEND extensions before the

security story was complete.  The CSI WG was then chartered to do that

work (among other things).

 

-Dave

 

From: Hemant Singh (shemant) [mailto:shemant at cisco.com]
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 6:20 AM
To: ipv6 at ietf.org
Cc: Dave Thaler
Subject: Experimental status of RFC 4389? ND Proxy

 

6man folks,

 

Does anyone know why RFC 4389 was deemed as Experimental for status as opposed to say, Standards Track?

 

Thanks,

 

Hemant