adrian at creative.net.au
Wed Feb 18 15:46:15 CST 2009
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009, Tony Hain wrote:
> No, the decision was to not blindly import all the excess crap from IPv4. If
> anyone has a reason to have a DHCPv6 option, all they need to do is specify
> it. The fact that the *nog community stopped participating in the IETF has
> resulted in the situation where functionality is missing, because nobody
> stood up and did the work to make it happen.
Please explain where you think "*nog" community is today representative
at all of the wider scale IPv6 deployment issues across the world?
I'm assuming IETF and ARIN/RIPE/APNIC/etc are busy talking to end-users
rather than just ISPs about the issues facing IPv6 adoption. Am I
mistaken or not?
More information about the NANOG