Keith, On 2011-06-24 23:47, Keith Moore wrote: ... > 1. Working groups often have strong biases and aren't representative of the > whole community. Put another way, a working group often represents only one > side of a tussle, and working groups are often deliberately chartered in such > a way as to minimize the potential for conflict within the group. So when > evaluating standards actions for the whole community, the consensus within a > working group means little. In this particular case, v6ops heavily > represents the interests of operators (who are naturally interested in having > IPv6 run smoothly in the long term) and works against the interests of > applications developers (who are naturally interested in having transition > mechanisms that allow them to ship code that uses IPv6 and an IPv6 > programming model regardless of whether the underlying network supports it).
I suspect that operators are *severely* under-represented on this list ([email protected]) because it is very noisy and operators have other priorities. Most of them are probably unaware of this discussion, in fact. Brian _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
