On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 19:52:31 -0400 Bill Bogstad <bogstad@pobox.com> 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>
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:31:22 +0100 Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-6man-prefixlen-p2p-00.txt
Drafts are drafts, and nothing more, aren't they?
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.)
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.
The IETF standards process is different to other standards organisations - publication of an RFC doesn't make it a standard. It is much more pragmatic, as operational history is also used as an input into the decision.
Bill Bogstad