That's really not the case at all. You're just projecting your own views about not thinking DHCPv6 is valid and making yourself and Lorenzo out to be the some sort of victims of NANOG and the ...
> university net nazis Did you really just write that? What we're arguing for here is choice, the exact opposite of the association you're trying to make here. It's incredibly poor taste to throw that term around in this context, and adds nothing to the discussion. People are not logical. They adopt a position and then look for information to support it rather than counter it; they even go as far as to ignore or dismiss relevant information in the face of logic. That's religion. And this entire discussion continues to be rooted in religion rather than pragmatism. DHCPv6 is a tool, just as SLAAC is a tool. IPv6 was designed to support both options because they both have valid use cases. Please allow network operators to use the best tool for the job instead of telling us all we're required to do it your way (can you even see how ridiculous this whole "nazi" name calling is given the position you're taking) You don't get to just say "I'm not going to implement this because I don't agree with it," which is what Google is doing in the case of Android. The reason Lorenzo has triggered such a backlash on NANOG is that is fundamental argument on why he doesn't see DHCPv6 as valid for the Android is quite frankly a very weak argument at best. If you're going to stand up and say you're not going to do what everyone else has already done, especially when it comes to implementation of fundamental standards that everything depends upon, you need to have a better reason for it than the one Lorenzo provided. I honestly hope he collects himself and takes the time to respond, because it really is a problem. As much as you may not want DHCPv6 to be a thing, it's already a thing. On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Laszlo Hanyecz <las...@heliacal.net> wrote: > Lorzenzo is probably not going to post anymore because of this. > > It looks to me like Lorenzo wants the same thing as most everyone here, > aside from the university net nazis, and he's got some balls to come defend > his position against the angry old men of NANOG. Perhaps the approach of > attacking DHCP is not the right one, but it sounds like his goal is to make > IPv6 better than how IPv4 turned out. > > Things like privacy extensions, multiple addresses and PD are great > because they make it harder for people to do address based tracking, which > is generally regarded as a desirable feature except by the people who want > to do the tracking. DHCPv6 is a crutch that allows operators to simply > implement IPv6 with all the same hacks as IPv4 and continue to do address > based access control, tracking, etc. It's like a 'goto' statement - it can > be used to do clever things, but it can also be used to hack stuff and > create very hard to fix problems down the road. I think what Lorenzo is > trying to do is to use his influence/position to forcefully prevent people > from doing this, and while that may not be the most diplomatic way, I > admire his courage in posting here and trying to reason with the mob. > > -Laszlo > > > On Jun 10, 2015, at 10:24 PM, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > > > On 06/10/2015 02:51 PM, Paul B. Henson wrote: > >>> From: Lorenzo Colitti > >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 8:27 AM > >>> > >>> please do not construe my words on this thread as being Google's > position > >>> on anything. These messages were sent from my personal email address, > and I > >>> do not speak for my employer. > >> Can we construe your postings on the issue thread as being Google > and/or Androids official position? They are posted by lore...@google.com > with a tag of "Project Member", and I believe you also declined the request > in the issue under that mantle. > >> > >> > > Oh, stop this. The only thing this will accomplish is a giant black hole > of silence from anybody at Google and any other $MEGACORP > > in a similar situation. > > > > Mike > > -- Ray Patrick Soucy Network Engineer University of Maine System T: 207-561-3526 F: 207-561-3531 MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network www.maineren.net
