nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Confusion
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:55:15 +0900
This may be where Randy Bush derives his "IVTF" label.
not exactly. see <http://archive.psg.com/051000.ccr-ivtf.pdf>.
Yes, there have been attempts to bridge the two camps, but I suspect the only way to really address this is a fundamental shift in the way the IETF does business, taking into account the fact that network operators and end users, by and large, are not the implementors of protocols and don't actually care how they are implemented, but rather the folks who define what the protocols need to do. I'll admit some skepticism that such a change is actually feasible.
standards bodies used to be composed of users meeting to drive vendors to common specs so the users had freedom of choice and inter-operation. the ietf has become vendors inventing new and ever more complex features to drive users to minimal margins. randy
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 Confusion, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Adrian Chadd (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Nathan Ward (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Adrian Chadd (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Matthew Moyle-Croft (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Nathan Ward (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Matthew Moyle-Croft (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Jack Bates (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion David Barak (Feb 18)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Tony Hain (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion David Conrad (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Randy Bush (Feb 18)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Nick Hilliard (Feb 19)
- RE: IPv6 Confusion Tony Hain (Feb 19)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Mark Andrews (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Mark Andrews (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Leen Besselink (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion David Conrad (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Mark Andrews (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion David Conrad (Feb 17)
- Re: IPv6 Confusion Zaid Ali (Feb 17)