Re: how V6OPS arrived at the present consensus about firewalls

[james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>]

On Apr 19, 2007, at 02:29, Gert Doering wrote:
> it's very well possible that these individuals have overlooked some  
> of the implications that this might
> bring with it.

I brought the issue to the attention of the authors of draft-ietf- 
v6ops-nap quite some time ago, and they assured the V6OPS group that  
this was not an oversight on their part, and that the consensus  
behind the recommendation is widely shared throughout the Internet  
engineering community.  They noted that the draft has been the  
subject of intensive discussions for several years now, working group  
last call, IESG review, and is now in the RFC Editor Queue awaiting  
the start of its AUTH48 event.

I was initially offering my remarks in the context of what I  
mistakenly thought was be an editorial matter.  If there is any  
technical controversy, it is *not* coming from me and never did.  As  
I've explained elsewhere, I'm not in any position to mount a  
technical case for preserving end-to-end IPv6 connectivity,  
particularly considering the strength of the authorities lined up on  
the other side of that argument.


--
j h woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>