On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 02:03:47AM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
maybe I'm misled but I've never thought of the registries as bodies
whose purpose was to collect operational experience.
but yes, I'd very much like for IETF to have more input from those
involved in operation, as well as having more input from more
applications developers, as well as having more input from those who
understand architecture, as well as having more input from actual users
or user groups. we need all of those kinds of input.
Keith
as an IETF member, i might suggest that those mountains will
not come to you on their own. i will suggest you follow
the advice Ray (and others) have given - If you want to
understand them and get their input, you have to go to
their fora.
I told Ray that I would write up something and send it to ARIN. but I
don't see how that will solve the problem of getting more relevant input
to IETF. allocation sizes still need to be decided in IETF, not by
RIRs. if it's really necessary to give RIRs or ISPs more bits to play
with, then IMO there's a good chance that IETF needs to revisit some
other IPv6 design decisions.
two step process:
1) go to arin
2) listen to their concerns
i understand your desire to go to arin and tell them what
to do, but listening and trying to understand WHY they are
making the choices/options they are would go a long way -
*IF* the IETF should reconsider what it has done.
looking forward to your joining the PPML list and your participation
there.
--
--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf