Pars, OK, last warning (w/ Area director copied). If we see any further posts on this (or similar out of scope topics on this list) from you, we will remove your ability to send email to this mailing list.
We also request others to stop responding to this thread. Bob On Apr 11, 2012, at 1:05 AM, Pars Mutaf wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Mohacsi Janos <moha...@niif.hu> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2012, Pars Mutaf wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Manfredi, Albert E > <albert.e.manfr...@boeing.com> wrote: > > Yes, that was also my reaction. Why one Internet? Because Internet means > tying together multiple separate networks. Of course you can have the same > addresses on the different networks. Nothing new there either. That?s > why we have NATs, NAPTs, and IPv6 NPTs. > > > > > No one is forcing an ISP or an enterprise network to use a combination > of protocols. They can already opt to be IPv4 only, or IPv6 only, or dual > stack, or eventually IPv7. Matter of fact, years ago, our enterprise had > an assortment of different networks, tied together by Softswitch gateways. > IPv4, SNA, DECnet. > > > > > I have no problem with anyone. I am facing my own illusions. > > Here is my conclusion after years of work on IPv6. > > IPv6 guy is just a salesman. > > But the salesman thought the entire world should buy his product. > > Not, but a reasonable technology for go forward with. > > > The product cannot change. > > Wrong, See evolution of IPv6 in the past 10 years - lot has been changed - > due to better understanding of requirements and drawback of certain solutions. > > > > There is no other product. > > Yes there are, but ipv6 seems to be most reasonable at the moment. > > > > Not even sure the product was really needed. > > See ipng work in the late 90's - it was requirement driven. > > > Complete delusion. > > > Please describe your conception in details - we can compare solutions based > on technical merits. > > Sorry I don't see the problem yet. I wouldn't design a solution nor discuss > its details. > > Designing the future makes me suffer. > > Pars > > > Best Regards, > Janos Mohacsi > > > > Pars > > > > Bert > > > > From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo > Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 2:54 PM > To: Pars Mutaf > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Why one Internet? > > > > Wasn't this what the Internet was supposed to be? I'm tempted to ask how old > you are, but I don't want to be rude. > > As the Monty Python would put it: 'You see, the key is in the name - Inter - > net(work)' > > :-) > > cheers > > Carlos > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
