Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Sun, 16 December 2007 16:48 UTC

Return-path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J3wfW-0007Eh-F0; Sun, 16 Dec 2007 11:48:46 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J3wfU-00077k-Bj; Sun, 16 Dec 2007 11:48:44 -0500
Received: from balder-227.proper.com ([192.245.12.227]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J3wfS-0000xr-1U; Sun, 16 Dec 2007 11:48:44 -0500
Received: from [165.227.249.204] (dsl-63-249-108-169.cruzio.com [63.249.108.169]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id lBGGmenQ002139 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 09:48:40 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240814c38b0254dca1@[165.227.249.204]>
In-Reply-To: <47654A96.6040507@dcrocker.net>
References: <457D36D9D89B5B47BC06DA869B1C815D05DAD00D@exrad3.ad.rad.co.il> <47654A96.6040507@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:48:38 -0800
To: iaoc@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, IETF Announcement list <ietf-announce@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22
Cc:
Subject: Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

At 7:56 AM -0800 12/16/07, Dave Crocker wrote:
>Yaakov Stein wrote:
>>Why don't we dedicate a separate 2 hour plenary just to this 
>>experiment with the moderator announcing workarounds and collected 
>>statistics ?
>
>That's not a plenary.
>
>That's an interoperability event.

Not at all: it is an operations experiment. The (probably valid) 
assumption is that if people can get their systems set up correctly, 
there will be good interoperability once bits are flowing end to end. 
The test is getting their systems set up.

>The IETF doesn't do those...

...but should. In the VPN Consortium's logo testing, we see much more 
difficulty with the operations side of IPsec than in the IPsec 
protocol itself. I would not be surprised to hear similar results for 
other protocol suites, such as IPv6.

Having the IETF see first-hand the operational aspects of its 
protocols would probably have a positive effects on the protocols it 
produces.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf