On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
It would make a great sense to do that, IMHO, but I'm not sure if we're quite far enough yet to have gained sufficient understanding what needs to be clarified. When 3056 is rewritten, it can probably be compressed to 10-15 pages at the same time.I don't see how. There are quite some variants of 6to4 that haven't been used, but that doesn't seem to be grounds for undocumenting them. I think it's 3068 that needs rewriting, to document what has been learnt about using anycast relays to support host-based 6to4.
Based on classification of draft-iab-protocol-success-01.txt, you could almost consider 6to4 as a "wild success". From Section 1.3:
A wildly successful protocol is so useful that it can solve more problems or address more scenarios or devices. This may indicate that it is time to revise the protocol to better accommodate the new design space.Only the host-based 6to4 approach has gained measurable deployment, which leads me to think that we should focus on that in the specifications.
Unused or non-deployed ideas are routinely removed when revising specs. "BGP-based 6to4" is one that should be at the minimum rephrased, if not outright removed.
-- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings