At 20:54 29/08/03, Keith Moore wrote:
Personally I think a forum might be a bit premature, as it would
distract various peoples' energy away from efforts to draft strawman
architectures, and instead tempt them to spend time getting in sync with
the group. Maybe we could have a BOF in Minneapolis and wait for after
that to formally organize a discussion group?
I fully agree with that. However I feel that the IPv6 numbering plan and
all the related issues are / have beein discussed a lot in different fora
without addressing my expectations - and since I am just one inter pares -
without probably addressong many other ones expectations. This makes all of
us uncertain about what has been discussed, where, how specialists have
decided things we think we have to disagree with, where we can contribute
in wasting the minium time for everyone.
Might I suggest a preliminary approach: instead of trying to propose
solutions now, why not to try to list all the demands. Independently from
any solution. Then to try to put some order into them by possible
solutions. Such a step could be open to everyone. I am sure that many of us
would leave the rest to specialists should we be sure that our pet needs
will be supported or will be considered.
Also, I understand that many feel there is a possible need for multiple
numbering plans. It would be better to clarify that now.
I must say that this mail is also a test to see if I am flamed because I
would be - as many other here who do not tell it - ignoring what I should
know. A good way to learn. IPv6 is not something for specialists to define:
it concerns everyone, and everything in the network archiecture.