Re: simpler prefix delegation

[Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>]

matthew.ford@bt.com wrote:
> 
> On 18 March 2004, Pekka Savola wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Ralph Droms wrote:
> > > Is there interest in expending any more of the IETF's resources
> > > reopening a problem for which we have rough consensus on a
> > solution,
> > > published specifications and running code?
> >
> > You say that carefully, but still giving an impression as if
> > rough consensus had been gauged that only one solution would
> > be specified -- otherwise there would not be "reopening" the
> > problem. That has never been even raised (AFAIR); I'd
> > certainly have objected.
> >
> > The fact that there is a solution out there, which fits the
> > needs of some users, does not mean that there can not (or
> > should not) be a different kind of solution which would seem
> > to be much more appropriate in some other scenarios or for
> > some other users.
> 
> As I've said before in reference to the recursive name server discovery
> discussion, I don't believe it benefits the network operations community
> to have multiple solutions to these kind of requirements.

The vendor community would probably agree. 

   Brian



--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------