Re: POLL: Consensus for moving forward with Teredo?

[Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM>]

On Apr 30, 2004, at 10:32 AM, Pekka Savola wrote:

> Hi,
> The options regarrding Teredo at this stage seem to be:
>
>  a) Go forward with Teredo, hone the deployment implications in the
>     unmanaged analysis in parallel (if and as appropriate),
>
>  b) Conclude that there is no sufficiently strong need for Teredo, and
>     not support its advancement (for PS) at this stage, or
>
>  c) Decide that we need to analyze the scenarios or deployment more
>     before being able to make a decision.
>
>     If so, please state where you believe more analysis is needed..
>     and volunteer if possible :)

There is an alternative:

d) publish it as Experimental.

There is code out there, deployable by the millions,
so it is good to document it formally. However, for the reasons Marc 
gave, I'm not
convinced that PS is the right approach.
Actually, I would suggest that Isatap be published as Experimental 
along Terredo,
for the same reasons.

	- Alain.