[128313] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Fri Jul 30 07:52:17 2010
To: Matthew Walster <matthew@walster.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:11:04 BST."
<AANLkTi=g0RiC9Lx7+k=gJcCuOdFZf8uUkG0HtWLucpGf@mail.gmail.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:51:36 -0400
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1280490696_4712P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:11:04 BST, Matthew Walster said:
> Seriously, this is getting silly. I'm not even going to respond any
> more - if you genuinely think users care about network management,
> you're wrong. They treat it as a black box, and that isn't going to
> change for a long, long, long time.
The point you're missing is that users may not care about network management
*directly* - but they may care very much about the *features* that the
network-ready appliance they bought at Best Buy provides them using multiple
subnets under the hood. If the box says "provides separate 'Guest' wireless
access", that can be a selling point even if the user doesn't know it happens
because the unit uses separate subnets for the "home" and "guest" addresses.
End users are already used to a world where they plug in some hardware, run a
program off the CD, have it ask a few questions about how you want to use the
device, click the 'Do It!' button, and it all works. If networking is any
different experience *for the end user*, we've as an industry screwed up big
time.
--==_Exmh_1280490696_4712P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFMUrzIcC3lWbTT17ARAsXLAJ0crGTVHB4hR/IY60lfJaKHrXkgogCghr0v
SdgHt1yoCW3vFajgo1lYyO0=
=/ZTG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1280490696_4712P--
