Re: NAT64/NAT-PT update in IETF, was: Re: Important New Requirement for IPv4 Requests [re "impacting revenue"]

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>]

On 23 apr 2009, at 12:23, Nathan Ward wrote:

> Just participating in mailing lists is good for keeping up to date,  
> but not so good for getting things changed.

> That's what I've found, anyway. Might not always be true.

Depends on the issue. Sometimes bad ideas get traction in the IETF,  
it's hard to undo that. But there are also times when even a single  
message containing good arguments can have an effect.

Also don't expect too much from IETF participation: if doing X is  
going to make a vendor more money than doing Y, they're going to favor  
X, even if Y is the superior solution.