Did we forget the IETF motto about running code ? I do understand that there is a need to alleviate risks in the operational network, so a traditional operational IPv4 network has to be maintained until a vast majority of IETFers have assessed the proper operation of IPv6.
But this doesn't prevent to operate a more advanced technology simultaneously. Someone has to start and experiment the shortcomings, if the IETF is not doing it no body is going to do it or nobody is going to be put any trust in a new technology. IETF has to pioneer this as it did so far (multicast, security, IPv6, and hopefully more will experimented at the IETF). Anyway, IPv6 is not experimental, it runs alright in operational networks. What I think the IETF should experiment now at a wider scale is the transition tools between IPv6 and IPv4. This would only be meaningful if results of the experiments are published, for instance in the IETF journal. Regards, Thierry. On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:18:11 -0700 Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote: >>>> The IETF network is not, and never has been, for experimentation, >>>> showing off new technology, or making political statements. Please keep >>>> it that way. >>> +1 >> >> RFC1883 is not new. > > >Neither is X.400, TP0, or many other specs. But then, that's not the issue. > >The issue is operational risk. > >d/ > >-- > > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net > >_______________________________________________ >Ietf mailing list >Ietf@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > -- Thierry ERNST, PhD INRIA Rocquencourt France Project-Team IMARA / JRU LARA http://www.lara.prd.fr +33 1 39 63 59 30 (office) -- The coming end of the IPv4 world: http://penrose.uk6x.com _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
