-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 20, 2007, at 4:59 AM, Theodore Tso wrote:
I think the IETF oldie perspective is ... amazement
Truer words were never spoken, at least from this oldie's
perspective. I found Dave Crocker's comment that the IETF never does
interoperability testing equally amazing. The IETF has never offered
the room (that is something a host does), but to describe the semi-
annual PPP-fests that occurred throughout the 1990's, the OSPF
testing that resulted in RFC 1246, and all the interoperability
testing that has been done since, as unrelated to IETF activity
is ... interesting. Here, I thought we were all IETF participants
testing IETF specifications and products based on them, providing
test results as called for in RFC 2026 and working group document
feedback, and in the end demonstrating the "running code" part of the
IETF mantra.
In the next year, let's try to do whatever ENGINEERING work is
necessary so that the IETF conference network can offer IPv6-only
services to all of its laptop clients, and that this be sufficient
for people to get real work done.
Actually, with the exception of the root zone record, I think this
has been true of the laptops brought to meetings for some time.
Anyone running a Mac has had IPv6 support and IPv6-capable
applications for some time. Ditto Linux, and it was possible to make
Windows XP use it. Microsoft Vista makes that on-by-default, making
this more the case as people upgrade to it. IETF meeting networks
have supported IPv6 for several years, and IIRC have provided ISP
support as well.
Now, do you recall Randy Bush sitting in the IESG plenary and calling
out passwords? Advising people to get some variation on a VPN
running? For me, the big issue is that I do my work within a
corporate context, and therefore need to access corporate accounts to
do what I do. Cisco IT has a plan to deploy IPv6, but has not yet
done so internally for a reason that will, I think, ring true for
many - IPv6 doesn't solve a business problem that Cisco IT has (it
has plenty of addresses for the present and has few if any IPv6-only
business partners that would force the issue), and hence it hasn't
seen fit to bring up IPv6 throughout Cisco.
For me, making me able to "do real work" will involve a whole lot
more than making the room work. I think the experiment is a good one,
and if it gets the root zone record updated it has IMHO already had a
good effect. But I personally need for more to happen to be able to
effectively use it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFHaqR3bjEdbHIsm0MRAqBKAJ9+04ilgwt9JBm+og4kJRFBpowmfwCfT4bc
0atUFKRxGziKZepDfQAKxRQ=
=G9z1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf