Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?)

Sun Jul 10 17:41:28 UTC 2011

On 7/10/2011 12:16 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On 2011-07-10 17:56 , David Miller wrote:
> [..]
>> +1
>>
>> The lack of will on the part of the IETF to attract input from and involve
>> operators in their processes (which I would posit is a critical element in
>> the process).
> Ehmmmm ANYBODY, including you, can sign up to the IETF mailing lists and
> participate there, just like a couple of folks from NANOG are already doing.
>
> You are on NANOG out of your own free will, the same applies to the
> IETF. If you don't participate here your voice is not heard either, just
> like at the IETF.

True, anyone can participate in the IETF processes.  However, if key 
players do
not participate, then something is broken.  I will take my lumps for not
participating.

My point was - "If fingers can be pointed at both sides, i.e. operators and
IETF, then both sides are to blame."

In the corporate world, if I were contemplating changing the framework of a
system, then I would need to get buy in / agreement from the stakeholders of
that system. If I was going to change the framework behind an HR system, 
then
the HR managers and HR systems experts would all have to agree to the 
change.
If I changed the framework and broke all of the HR systems and then told 
my boss
that I scheduled a meeting and nobody from HR showed up and therefore I used
that as agreement in their absence, then I would get fired.  Yes, I 
understand
that corporate environments are very different from the IETF 
environment, but
there are perhaps some lessons to learn from the corporate environment.

Most RFCs operate within a meritocracy.  A standard can be proposed for
"Example Protocol v10" and if nobody likes it outside of the IETF, then 
it is
not implemented by anyone and it eventually dies on the vine.  IPv6 is
"different" in that it is the underpinning of every other 
protocol/standard that
will exist on or operate over the internet for the next 20-30 years 
(probably)
We had 10+ years of IPv6 not being implemented by anyone (seriously), yet it
didn't die on the vine.  Perhaps the process for "Example Protocol v10" 
and the
process for IPv6 should be different - given the fundamental difference 
in their
scope.

No, we can't change the past.  "Those who do not learn from history are 
doomed
to repeat it." - Santayana.  I would say that many variables that got us to
where we are today - which is out of IPv4 addresses and faced with only 
IPv6,
which many believe is fundamentally flawed, as our only way forward - 
holds some
lessons to be learned... but perhaps this is just me - and if so, I 
apologize
for the noise.

>
> Peeking at the ipv6 at ietf.org member list, I don't see your name there.
> You can signup here: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6

Absolutely true, fixed.

>
> Greets,
>   Jeroen

-DMM