Re: Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary

["Robert E. Seastrom" <rs () seastrom com>]

Ryan Malayter <malayter () gmail com> writes:

> On Mar 12, 10:07 am, "Robert E. Seastrom" <r... () seastrom com> wrote:
> > It didn't help that there was initially no implementation of shim6
> > whatsoever.  That later turned into a single prototype implementation
> > of shim6 for linux.  As much as I tried to keep an open mind about
> > shim6, eventually it became clear that this was a Gedankenexperiment
> > in protocol design.  Somewhere along the line I started publicly
> > referring to it as "sham6".  I'm sure I'm not the only person who came
> > to that conclusion.
>
> I thought the IETF required two inter-operable implementations for
> protocols. Or was that just for standards-track stuff?

Rough consensus and working code is soooooo 1993.

-r