Terry > I feel like the discussion so far is diverging into an academic free-for-all > without seeing something more tangible than the current state.
Ask the ietf about this, I've developed IPv10 on August, 2014 before the problem takes that level after the consecutive announcements of IPv4 address space depletion. I'm expecting +10 years for my second ID (KHALED Routing Protocol "KRP") to be standardized. -----Original Message----- From: Terry Manderson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 6:12 PM To: Khaled Omar; Lee Howard Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Int-area] Fw: Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion. Khaleed, I would like to highlight a well-known idiom in the IETF, about the IETF. "Rough consensus and running code" The means that not only does one need to demonstrate the benefits of their idea in a working implementation (a protocol stack in this case), and really the onus is on you to have a cohort of people about you to develop that stack if you alone do not have the skills, but then also to gain consensus of the IETF as to the technology in question. I feel like the discussion so far is diverging into an academic free-for-all without seeing something more tangible than the current state. Cheers Terry INT Area AD. On 1/04/2017, 2:05 AM, "Int-area on behalf of Khaled Omar" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: > I don¹t see any evidence that you are gaining consensus. Jen¹s suggestion was very good: develop a stack and get some deployment experience to show it can work. There are many people who likes IPv10 and support it, also I'm not a software developer who works for a company developing an OS, if you don't believe that this idea works, you have to try it by yourself and get back to me with the result and what was your problem, maybe you are not good in writing codes or whatever. -----Original Message----- From: Lee Howard [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 5:35 PM To: Khaled Omar; Jen Linkova Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Int-area] Fw: Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion. On 3/31/17, 10:02 AM, "Int-area on behalf of Khaled Omar" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >> So far many people mentioned to you that updating software on clients >>and on network devices is very expensive, complicated and slow process. > >SOFTWARE UPDATES are expensive, complicated and slow process ! Yes. Years, and hundreds or thousands of hours of expensive labor. See where I explained it yesterday at https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area/current/msg05589.html And that¹s if we stipulate that this can be done in software, which I don¹t. I don¹t see any evidence that you are gaining consensus. Jen¹s suggestion was very good: develop a stack and get some deployment experience to show it can work. Lee _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
