Re: IPv6 RIR policy [was Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all]

[Bill Manning <bmanning at ISI.EDU>]

On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 10:58:21PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
> >> perhaps, but if IETF has the problem that it's not willing to assert its
> >> ownership over its own protocols, that problem is better addressed in
> >> IETF than in ARIN.
> >>     
> >
> > 	very true.  but throwing protocols "over the wall" and 
> > 	ignoring operational input does tend to affect the credibility
> > 	and/or the usefulness of said protocol. Or are you suggesting
> > 	that the IETF designs protocols without regard to operational
> > 	relevence?
> >   
> 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.

--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.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf