Re: RFC4214 to standard?

[Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 08:54:54AM +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I guess I used "your" colloquially to mean "one's".
> You (Fred) may have noticed some discussion about RA
> problems caused by one's (my) favourite solution,
> 6to4. Sorry to be obscure. However, I was trying to
> make a general point - about the only technique where
> I feel we have solid trouble-free operational experience
> is plain old dual stack. I don't see any real grounds to
> demote any of the existing PS mechanisms except NAT/PT,
> but I don't see any grounds for promoting anything either.

I'd add the tunnel broker model to the list of (relatively) widely deployed 
and reasonably robust methods.   Promoting its status doesn't make it any
more widely deployed though, really.

Tim