On Jul 31, 2008, at 9:52 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
I understand that IETF has not done a good job in communicating
about our
work and I appreciate that this is being improved, however I think
we need
to be very careful.
Yesterday, during dinner, one of the discussions with my colleagues,
was
about this topic.
Some considered that part of the delay of the IPv6 deployment was
due to the
lack of communication effort from IETF. I'm not really sure about
that,
however I agree that everything helps, of course.
My consideration is on the other way around about the latest press
about
IPv6 and NAT. Obviously the press is not presenting the info in the
right
way, but this is our fault.
I don't think anybody from the community, or the IETF organization
has the
right to do and interview, and speak on behalf of the community and
NOT make
sure to review the interview BEFORE it is published. In my opinion
is a big
mistake and a lesson to learn, because in this case the damage to IPv6
deployment is possibly much higher than what we as engineers could
foresee.
I'd like to share my own experience here: I was interviewed by exactly
the same reporter some time ago, and I requested to review the article
before publication. But the very next thing I learned was that the
article had been published, and the interview misquoted.
I questioned the reporter why she ignored my request, the reply was
that it was the magazine's policy not allowing preview --- something
they never told me beforehand.
One lesson learned.
Lixia
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf