On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 13-sep-2005, at 0:22, Igor Gashinsky wrote: > > > (firmly in the shim6 does not adress *most* of the issues camp) > > So where were you the past years in multi6 and months in shim6? > Please be part of the solution and not part of the problem. (That > goes for John Payne and Daniel Senie too.) > pleas don't slam Igor, daniel nor John... I'm of the opinion (possibly wrong and these three can correct me if so) that they thought this would get sorted out because people knew multihoming is important to business... (which I was too until his last IETF :( ) So, my post 1 month ago about this and the followup on this topic were tries to get operators involved in the problem/process. that's happened with atleast john/Patrick/igor and that's a GOOD THING, yes? > I'll be happy to continue any and all discussions of multihoming in > IPv6 off-list, but having them on the NANOG list doesn't seem to be > very productive. > it is because it's highlighting the problem of lack of support... and need for NANOG-ish operators to GET INVOLVED before they get stuck with something that will not work for them. -Chris
