On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 4:18 PM Khaled Omar <[email protected]> wrote:
> But none of these transitioning solutions are widely deployed, maybe it is > IPv10 time ;-) > False. > > > Khaled Omar > > > > *From:* Erik Kline <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Sunday, September 20, 2020 1:05 AM > *To:* Khaled Omar <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Fred Baker <[email protected]>; Eric Vyncke (evyncke) > <[email protected]>; int-area <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Int-area] Still need to know what has changed.... Re: > IPv10 draft (was Re: FW: [v6ops] v6ops - New Meeting Session Request for > IETF 109 - IPv10) > > > > As noted before: RFCs 6052, 6146, 6147, 6877, 7915, and others comprise > the solution deployed to literally hundreds of millions if not billions of > mobile devices and numerous access networks worldwide. > > > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 5:24 AM Khaled Omar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> Who are these “many people”, and what problem do they see being solved? > > Network engineers everywhere, they are waiting for the announcement of an > official robust solution to the depletion of the IPv4 address space and the > division that occurs recently on the Internet. > > People read the draft and many wrote about it because the idea is simple > and requires no intervention from their side, that’s why I ask the IETF to > take the draft seriously and put personal benefits aside for now, as LATER > everything will back to normal, believe me, all are in need for this. > > Khaled Omar > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Baker <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 12:24 PM > To: Khaled Omar <[email protected]> > Cc: Roland Bless <[email protected]>; Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyncke= > [email protected]>; int-area <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Still need to know what has changed.... Re: IPv10 > draft (was Re: FW: [v6ops] v6ops - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 109 > - IPv10) > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Sep 17, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Khaled Omar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Regarding the confusion, the community is curious about the idea, many > people support it as it solves the problem that they think they are not > part of it. > > This statement has me a little confused. I see a lot of commentary, but I > don’t see people commenting along those lines. I frankly see commentary > similar to what I sent you declining a v6ops slot, > > Who are these “many people”, and what problem do they see being solved? > _______________________________________________ > 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
