ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Adventures in IPv6

2011-04-12 04:57:42
On 12 apr 2011, at 1:39, Doug Barton wrote:

http://bens.me.uk/2011/adventures-in-ipv6

What a bunch of whining.

When I first started doing IPv4 it was much harder than this.

Of course, I think the conclusion is basically wrong, *not* doing
IPv6 is much worse than breaking the finger-pointing circle, and
making it work by whatever means necessary.

"Much worse" for who? Just because we (may) believe that IPv6 is the way 
forward doesn't mean that the providers or consumers of Internet services 
will agree with us.

I'm sure most airline passengers have few opinions on the merits of wingtips, 
either. The engineers can tell you they are a good thing. We don't let the 
public's ignorance override that judgement.

The consumers just want to watch their videos and read their mail. The 
providers just want to sell them that capability. IPv6 needs to solve more 
problems than it creates, or else it's not the right answer.

It's too late for that discussion now.

If there is some aspect to IPv6 that is broken, we need to fix it as soon as 
possible. But IPv6 is been around for 15 years with ONE WEEK to go before APNIC 
runs dry of addresses it can give out through the regular process, so debating 
the merits of design choices now is pointless.

If you read that whiney blogpost you'll see that none of it is about problems 
that the IETF can fix.

It's also important that we show a little understanding and compassion when 
people whine (unlike what I've been doing here) but only a little, mostly we 
have to convey that IPv6 is ready for prime time and no negotiation is possible 
at this point. It's strange, but people actually get angrier when you agree 
with them when they complain. They want and expect you to hold your ground 
while they vent and afterwards they are usually ready to face reality.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>