[lacnog] IETF SRv6-gate (Fwd: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?)

[Fernando Gont]

FYI.

Esto fue posteado hoy por un colega en la lista de IPv6, en donde 
finalmente se está haciendo un llamado a adopción a un documento que 
muchos lo consideran un "contrincante" de la propuesta de SRv6 impulsada 
principalmente por Cisco.

En el mismo, se hace referencia a "nuevas caras" que han aparecido en 
6man para oponerse al documento en cuestión, la mayoría de un conocido 
fabricante de equipos.

Esto, sumado al Appeal que presentamos hace poco mas de un mes sobre lo 
ocurrido en el Spring WG 
(https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/ietf-lac/2020-April/001460.html), tal 
vez le encuentren algo mas de sentido a los comentarios vertidos su 
momento en threads como estos 
(https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/ietf-lac/2019-July/001406.html , 
https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/ietf-lac/2019-July/thread.html).

Saludos,
Fernando Gont




-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?
Date: 	Thu, 28 May 2020 21:23:11 +1000
From: 	Mark Smith <markzzzsmith en gmail.com>
To: 	6MAN <6man en ietf.org>



I've been an active participant in the ipng, 6man and v6ops IETF working 
groups since 2002.

While I've only been to one IETF meeting in person since then (106, 
sponsored by the Internet Society), over that time I've come to 
recognise the names of many of the regular and active participants in 
these IPv6 working groups.

I do not recognise many of the names of people who are objecting to the 
6man working group adopting the CRH draft.

Those who have been active 6man participants in recent years would know 
that even an ID adopted by 6man, written by Bob and Brian, that had a 
number of revisions, didn't survive WG last call, and that occurred 
while Bob was (as he still is) one of the 6man WG chairs.


Regards,
Mark.