ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Not Listening to the Ops Customer (was Re: Issues in wider geographic participation)

2013-05-31 19:28:05
amen!  :)

On 31May2013Friday, at 17:23, Randy Bush wrote:

< rant >

the sad fact is that the ietf culture is often not very good at
listening to the (ops) customer.  look at the cf we have made out of
ipv6.  the end user, and the op, want the absolute minimal change and
cost, let me get an ipv6 allocation from the integer rental monopoly,
flip a switch or two, and get 96 more bits no magic.  15 years later,
dhcp is still a cf, i have to run a second server (why the hell does
isc not merge them?), i can not use it for finding my gateway or vrrp
exit, ...  at least we got rid of the tla/nla classful insanity.  but
u/g?  puhleeze.

at ripe/dublin, olaf gave a really nice but somewhat glib talk about
technology adoption, using dnssec and ipv6 as the positive examples.  as
some curmudgeonly schmuck pointed out at the mic, dnssec is forward
compatible and there are no alternatives, so it is being adopted despite
its complexity and warts.  ipv6 is not forward compatible, we put
unnecessary obstacles in the deployment path, and there are
alternatives.  d o o m.

if we had wanted ipng deployed, we would have done everything we could
to make it simple and easy for net-ops and end users to turn it on.
instead, we made it complex and hard and then blame everyone else for
not instantly adopting it en masse.  the ietf did not listen to or
consider the customer.  this is fatal.  and the arrogance is taking what
is left of the e2e internet down the drain with it.

</rant>

randy

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