An RFC is an RFC when it is an RFC (Was: Question Re: best practices)
tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Tue May 10 00:12:24 CEST 2011
On 9 May 2011, at 22:48, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> The first responders to the OP's question apparently could
> not resist dragging in RFC numbers rather than (as Cameron eventually
> did, after my prodding) simply produce a list of NAT64 vendor implementations that the OP could use. Thus, the status of the RFC
> became relevant.
Citing RFCs - not 'dragging them in' - is simply a way of giving the most up-to-date reference for the original poster.
Yes, some of us misread the question, but I think the answers have now been given.
More information about the ipv6-ops