I also think that we must think positive about this.
We do need to try things out. I think we started our very first
experiments with Wireless LAN at IETF 46 in Washington (I am just trying
to find a museum to take the plug-in card Nortel sold(?) me that was
never any use afterwards (the old 1Mbps not 802,11b 'standard') ). It
has taken us more or less 23 meetings to get to the point where
essentially Wi-Fi 'just worked' measured by traffic on the attendees
mailing list - it was sometimes a sore trial when 17 ad hoc networks
stopped you connecting to the outside world, but we have learnt how to
do it - and the vendors and operators have (I suspect) learnt a good
deal in parallel.
Also one or two ISPs have actually embraced IPv6. Mine (a smallish
outfit in the UK) has done so. To my shame I haven't exploited their
capabilities yet - my New Year's resolution is to fix this situation. I
could run native IPv6 if I find an ADSL modem/router that handles it but
in the meantime I can run a tunnel into my firewall box and go native
IPv6 elsewhere. Ot will be an interesting experiment and I should be
ready to handle any experiments at IETF. Have a look at
http://www.aaisp.net/aa/aaisp/ipv6.html
Regards
Elwyn
Jari Arkko wrote:
I agree with Leslie on this. It is important to approach this in the
right light. Not an interop event; that would be for the implementors of
the products. Not a demonstration that IPv4 is still required for most
things; we know that already. Not a one hour session where thousand
people try to install something new at the same time without a network;
there needs to be better model for that.
But I think we should still do something. I viewed Russ' call as an
opportunity for the IETF community to take a challenge and see what we
can make happen by IETF-71. As a personal note, I've had IPv6 turned on
my equipment, home site, and company site for years but during the last
few months I have tried create a situation where most of own
communications would be on IPv6. We converted the company mail servers
and gateways that I use to dual stack; some of my own web systems got
AAAA records too; I ensured that the tools that I use have the right
capabilities and defaults to use IPv6; I've contacted the admins of the
remaining IETF web sites that still are IPv4 only to ask if they can be
converted to dual stack. A significant part of my communications go over
IPv6 today, and I have a hope to get this to cover most of my
work-related communications. And yes, there's pain. I'm typically the
first one to experience the firewall config bug or routing issue on the
IPv6 side. But I'm willing...
So, I would suggest that we focus on the positive opportunities that
Leslie mentioned. Get more things to work. Challenge sponsors to do so
as well. Solve some of the remaining problems. Educate ourselves both by
doing and by seeing what others do or where they fail. See what works in
IETF-71 (but the format of that is less important).
Obviously, this needs planning -- Russ' mail is not the plan but rather
a call for us to figure out what would make sense. Much work needed...
I'm also somewhat surprised by the reluctance of people to try things
out. Where's our sense of adventure and eagerness to do new things? We
are engineers after all, tinkering with network setups should be fun,
no? Boldly go where no group of thousand has ever been... Or at the very
least, lets change something for the better.
Jari
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
