[142724] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ronald Bonica)
Tue Jul 12 11:32:38 2011
From: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
To: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 11:28:58 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20110711193508.GA97493@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Leo,
Maybe we can fix this by:
a) bringing together larger groups of clueful operators in the IETF
b) deciding which issues interest them
c) showing up and being vocal as a group in protocol developing working gro=
ups
To some degree, we already do this in the IETF OPS area, but judging by you=
r comments, we don't do it nearly enough.
Comments?
Ron
-----Original Message-----
From: Leo Bicknell [mailto:bicknell@ufp.org]=20
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 3:35 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?)
In a message written on Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 06:16:09PM +0200, Jeroen Massa=
r wrote:
> Ehmmmm ANYBODY, including you, can sign up to the IETF mailing lists=20
> and participate there, just like a couple of folks from NANOG are already=
doing.
The way the IETF and the operator community interact is badly broken.
The IETF does not want operators in many steps of the process. If you try =
to bring up operational concerns in early protocol development for example =
you'll often get a "we'll look at that later" response, which in many cases=
is right. Sometimes you just have to play with something before you worry=
about the operational details. It also does not help that many operationa=
l types are not hardcore programmers, and can't play in the sandbox during =
the major development cycles.
