[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [firstname.lastname@example.org: PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN]
On 16-apr-2006, at 6:09, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Wow, Iljitsch, I have never lost so much respect so quickly for
someone who was not flaming a specific person or using profanity.
Well, that's too bad. But several years of trying to get a scalable
multihoming off the ground (flying to different meetings on my own
dime) where first my ideas about PI aggregation are rejected within
the IETF mostly without due consideration because it involves the
taboo word "geography" only to see the next best thing being rejected
by people who, as far as I can tell, lack a view of the big picture,
is enough to make me lose my cool. Just a little.
Back on topic, it is not just those 60 people - the "playground"
appears to overwhelmingly agree with their position. I know I do.
Don't you think it's strange that the views within ARIN are so
radically different than those within the IETF? Sure, inside the IETF
there are also people who think PI in IPv6 won't be a problem, but
it's not the majority (as far as I can tell) and certainly not
anything close to 90%. Now the IETF process isn't perfect, as many
things depend on whether people feel like actually doing something.
But many of the best and the brightest in the IETF have been around
for some time in multi6 and really looked at the problem. Many, if
not most, of them concluded that we need something better than IPv4
practices to make IPv6 last as long as we need it to last. Do you
think all of them were wrong?
I am sorry your technical arguments have not persuaded us in the
past. But I would urge you to stick to those,