Re: Supermajority requirement off-by-one error, and TC chairmanship
* Steve Langasek:
>> The IETF will probably remove Rule 9 altogether (for both IPv4 and IPv6,
>> since the TLA/NLA/SLA model is dead and we're heading for IPv4-style
>> portable addresses in IPv6 land, too).
>
> Is this speculation, or have you heard this from the IETF?
"The IETF" as such does not exist, so my wording was a bit careless.
It's been discussed on the v6ops mailing list, and one of the authors of
the successor RFCs (Arifumi Matsumoto) seemed to favor the proposal to
drop Rule 9 (actually for both IPv4 and IPv6). Currently, IETF activity
is mostly frozen due to IETF-71. We'll see what happens afterwards.
Participation in the relevant WGs (v6ops and 6man, I think) is a good
idea if you care about IPv6, irrespective of this issue.
Reply to: