nanog mailing list archives
Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?)
From: Fred Baker <fred () cisco com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 19:13:15 -0400
On Jul 10, 2011, at 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. Peeking at the ipv6 () ietf org member list, I don't see your name there. You can signup here: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
Thanks, Jeroen. For IPv6 functionality, I'd suggest ipv6 () ietf org (https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6). For IPv6 operational issues, I'd suggest v6ops () ietf org (https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops). For security-related issues, you might also look into opsec () ietf org (https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec). On Jul 10, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Number two: While anyone can participate, approaching IETF as an operator requires a rather thick skin, or, at least it did the last couple of times I attempted to participate. I've watched a few times where operators were shouted down by purists and religion over basic real-world operational concerns.
That goes both ways. I periodically see dismissive statements about the IETF on operational lists, and dismissive statements about operators on IETF lists. I would classify David's comment as "dismissive", the kind of comment that causes IETF folks to not participate in operational meetings or lists, and the kind of comment cited by operational folks such as you as reasons to leave IETF meetings and lists. Such comments tend to come from a small set of individuals on each side. If such comments bother you, feel free to block the in-duh-viduals that send them. Personally, I try to listen to them; they are often telling me something I need to hear but don't want to.
Current thread:
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?), (continued)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Owen DeLong (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Joel Jaeggli (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Mark Andrews (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Cameron Byrne (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Joel Jaeggli (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Mark Andrews (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Joel Jaeggli (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Mark Andrews (Jul 13)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Owen DeLong (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Joel Jaeggli (Jul 12)
- Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was: Why is IPv6 broken?) Fred Baker (Jul 11)
- Re: Why is IPv6 broken? Nick Hilliard (Jul 11)
- Re: Why is IPv6 broken? Jeff Wheeler (Jul 11)
- Re: Why is IPv6 broken? Tom Hill (Jul 11)