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
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
