[180787] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Android (lack of) support for DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Wed Jun 10 13:06:12 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <f540cc9b-45ee-49b8-b011-566ec7381a3f@email.android.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 13:06:01 -0400
To: Jeff McAdams <jeffm@iglou.com>
Cc: NANOG List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Jun 10, 2015, at 11:36 AM, Jeff McAdams <jeffm@iglou.com> wrote:
>=20
> There is no other rational way to interpret your statement than to be =
a statement of Google's position.
As someone who posts from a personal email but my management has told me =
that I=E2=80=99m well identifiable as who I work for, I=E2=80=99m =
sympathetic to the way one can suffer a bit of personality split when =
certain business realities come into play. I=E2=80=99m sure people =
might mock me for it, but lots of people have mocked me for years so why =
should I care about this one so much?
When a business reality or necessity hits you in the face, sometimes you =
can=E2=80=99t do anything about it.
Would I have preferred if Apple and AT&T let me tether on my =
grandfathered unlimited plan? Sure. Could I do this before on my =
unlimited GPRS/Edge plan with my Nokia? Of course, but the reality is I =
can just carry another device/SIM and use a tablet to tether.
As google is in a business of selling ads on the internet, I can see why =
they might not want to pick a fight with a carrier at every stage in the =
process. The ROI just isn=E2=80=99t there is my guess.
IPv6 is mature enough to be widely deployed, but some of these cases =
need to have some give/take on both sides to work out. I=E2=80=99m =
reminded of the adage of if both sides are unhappy you cut the baby =
properly in half.
- jared=
