[134469] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NIST IPv6 document
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Ferguson)
Thu Jan 6 02:53:41 2011
In-Reply-To: <4D25733E.30602@bogus.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 23:52:58 -0800
From: Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster@gmail.com>
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Cc: Nanog Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> wrote:
> On 1/5/11 10:36 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 6, 2011, at 1:26 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
>>
>>> A bunch of very smart people have worked on IPv6 for a very long
>>> time, and justification for /64's was hashed out at extended
>>> length over the period of years.
>>
>> Very smart people can and do come up with bad ideas, and IPv6 is a
>> textbook example of this phenomenon, heh. I certainly bear my share
>> of the responsibility for this state of affairs by not getting
>> involved, and leaving the heavy lifting to others.
>
> The reason for standing on the shoulders of giants should not be to piss
> on them.
>
>
I sense an unnecessary level of acrimony here.
No one is pissing on the work done by the many folks who have spent many
years hashing out v6 work.
But I think you are missing a larger point -- much of the security
community has been summarily dismissed in its concerns along the way.
$.02,
- - ferg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003)
wj8DBQFNJXTUq1pz9mNUZTMRAs9BAKDh1N+BJFgmbROPSIOf+rM5v+Ol1ACbBfcr
qXiMOvfkjLtTaQX55I+Sc2U=3D
=3DaFv3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=20
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
=A0Engineering Architecture for the Internet
=A0fergdawgster(at)gmail.com
=A0ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
