[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at unfix.org
Thu Jul 22 10:10:19 CEST 2004
[ Cross-post, to get everybody in sync, Other messages in this thread can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail-archives/ipv6-wg/2004/msg00089.html ] On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 09:58, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: > On 2004-07-22, at 09.43, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > But indeed, if there is concensus or not 9/9/2004 and ip6.int is gone > > for me. > > I vote for 9/9/2004 and getting rid of it properly. Maintaining two > reverse threes will create more problems than it will solve. Take your pick: http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00.html http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00.txt http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00.xml Short, quick and easy. If no comments are risen for 16:00 today I'll submit this as an ID. Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20040722/967a8e8b/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]