[167832] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: turning on comcast v6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Leo Bicknell)
Mon Dec 30 18:10:17 2013
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
In-Reply-To: <B9F733AA-B590-43EB-8FB3-BC9A34D38F78@delong.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 17:09:48 -0600
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: Jamie Bowden <jamie@photon.com>,
North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--Apple-Mail=_7053EF82-47FF-464A-B7BA-E3D5196A515C
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=windows-1252
On Dec 30, 2013, at 3:43 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> The current situation isn=92t attributable to =93the current IPv6 =
crowd=94 (whoever that is), it=92s the current IETF consensus position. =
Changing that IETF consensus position is a matter of going through the =
IETF process and getting a new consensus. That requires justifying your =
position and convincing enough people willing to actively participate in =
the working group process of that position.
Some of us tried to engage the IETF on this topic in multiple working =
groups. If you search the archives you'll find this topic has come up =
before. I would charitably describe the environment there as "hostile" =
to anyone who has not been inside the IEFT machine for the last 15 =
years. And that's assuming the working group is "working", there are =
plenty inside the IEFT that are extremely dysfunctional even when the =
people on them "agree".
It's not enough to tell a bunch of enterprise people who have never =
dealt with the IETF before that they should go there are plead their =
case. Most do not know how, and the few who try find themselves berated =
by that community for being ignorant of the "way things should be".
What the enterprise folks need is IPv6 champions, like yourself, like =
Lee, to user stand their use case that even if you don't end up =
deploying it on your own network you will show up at the IETF, or at =
least participate on the IETF mailing lists and help them get what they =
need, so IPv6 deployment can proceed apace. If you really don't think =
there is harm, help them go get what they (think they?) need.
--=20
Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
--Apple-Mail=_7053EF82-47FF-464A-B7BA-E3D5196A515C
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=rIVo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_7053EF82-47FF-464A-B7BA-E3D5196A515C--
