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

[William Herrin <bill () herrin us>]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org> wrote:
> If the IETF really wanted to get useful operator impact, they would
> slightly modify their process.  On the front end there would be a
> more clear way for operational types to add to the To-Do list "stuff
> we really need to make the Internet work better".

Hi Leo,

That's an interesting idea, but how does it work?

As it stands, I can join a working group mailing list and submit an
I-D any time I feel like it. There is almost zero barrier to entry.
And I can take it to any step short of the final publication track
through the simple expedient of working on it myself.

How does the to-do list differ from this? Does it provide some kind of
push counter to the folks who hum against publication? How's it work?


>  Then, some sausage
> would be made largely without operator involvement (but hey, if you
> want to participate no exclusions), and then when developmen is
> about 80-90% done there would be an "operational testing and comment
> period".

That's another interesting idea. Would you mind gaming it out for me?
Use RFC 3484. You have I-D-v6-address-selection 90% ready for
publication as RFC 3484. Now what?

In their prescience, the operator feedback is going to be "with
multiple addresses on a server representing various Internet paths
with various reliabilities, we need a way to communicate to the client
which addresses to prefer based on our expert knowledge of the
reliability of our local network." What elicits that feedback? What do
the authors of I-D-v6-address-selection do with the feedback prior to
publication?

Thanks,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin () dirtside com  bill () herrin us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004