[LAC-TF] Cuestiones operacionales del direccionamiento IPv6 (Fwd: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard)

[Fernando Gont]

FYI

El mismo "bloodshed" al que se refiere Randy ha sido necesario para casi
todas las cosas que yo he hecho en IETF.

Cuando uno relaciona lo de abajo, con el manejo que logran hacer los
grandes vendors de los procesos de IETF, la cosa se vuelve aun mas penosa.


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version
6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 03:25:43 +0700
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg.com>
To: Job Snijders <job at ntt.net>
CC: 6man WG <ipv6 at ietf.org>, IETF-Discussion Discussion <ietf at ietf.org>,
draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis at ietf.org, 6man-chairs at ietf.org

>> "Conflicts with the NTT backbone" != "conficts with almost every
>> deployed backbone".
> 
> You gross over the fact that NTT connects with many other backbones, and
> that the data I shared is a reflection on both NTT's own addressing
> structure as well as peering partner's or customer's addressing.

face it job.  what we have here is non-ops telling us what we should do
and denying what we actually do and intend to keep doing.  welcome to
the ietf; we want ops here but that does not mean we want to listen to
them.

this is not new.  this is the last classful sickness needing expunging
from ipv6.  it has been a long trail.  you would have loved the insanity
of NLA/TLA; and it took some years of bloodshed to get rid of them.

randy

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6 at ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------