I certainly do not need to work out how to persuade my Checkpoint client to
talk to my corporate VPN via IPv6 in order to contribute to KEYPROV, DKIM or
any of the other WGs I will be attending.
The application is miserable enough at the best of times without additional
issues. And since the policy configuration is verified by the gateway I cannot
change the policy unilateraly.
The point about eating dog food is not to order the salespeople to eat the dog
food or else. If the salespeople refuse to eat the dog food you are meant to go
back and fix it. The approach being suggested here is to tell the salespeople
to eat it and like it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu]
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 3:56 PM
To: Clint Chaplin
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity
Clint Chaplin wrote:
I've been watching this debate for a while, and all the previous
debates every time this subject comes up.
IETF is no longer a single subject group. Very few
participants are
up to date with everything that IETF is working on, and many newer
participants are participating in what I would characterize
as "edge"
areas: capwap, manet, and the like.
I suspect (and I fall into this category) that many of these newer
participants are not IP wizards; they're here to do work in other
areas. Requiring them to participate in testing a new
infrastructure
that they are not familiar with would be counterproductive
to getting
their work done.
there is NOBODY working in IETF for whom familiarity with IP,
including IPv6, is not essential.
whether they realize this is a different question. but you
cannot do competent work in IETF without a basic
understanding of the TCP/IP protocol stack.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf