Re: [Int-area] Fw: Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.

Jen Linkova <> Fri, 31 March 2017 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1821A12998D for <>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:19:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.449
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id diIFJ43Jsdq3 for <>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E3471296B8 for <>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:19:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id b140so42823736iof.1 for <>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:19:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ze5apU23SzVb2ufgaEpikC9yBJ0dJsb6sMjeB4RzHpI=; b=kMsnHWVU1VeNqfEYJIt50InWY3425yV6VLqPUI2tX397j9Nwvmi2hz7+OlVNzgV3Zy 4mrF9XIGCHVeMkXkrvB74aRV7/rcXlkODA5zoOJj76kxG4H53AZgvcKIVMJf3xUww0rh 8/VUVi5R/SyTKO77KBxj9yF3iXDidG2p440bd7OKQxJTcr0hoBnjBKuWK31qCe/mlHLG /JNcCn7cCdxyjMzUAx7/meEWrsABoiDkD1o4Jj8mvQt+dJclyttUxDATjn7ndF1UFmYG R3VlWLwxdjJ3PHZFcexrBF1vAkK6WniF5+sYdA5YGm645SLQPNV1qkqC4bzco7uvopyc fLNw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ze5apU23SzVb2ufgaEpikC9yBJ0dJsb6sMjeB4RzHpI=; b=cOwoK5GhYpehIvF0S1sHk+Myop5aeYLz/CShP0WZn337i8achK2x46zvqbfnhdS1uK bN7LXyUWfOpD0oEa75rE0iQ+BOqYfmpq1+2MMkYjGzKRJFuR1VPrWsHqfdC+AH/k7Tf1 qu5L2LVmDZUj77iJdv961+9KkLvHBLsRYiVyQNdzN4VKQXWd5BzSglA9yo8nqHIobedo h3YeZ09YguDXSMER1Bslx3F0haLz5aWJnrhTLuKzGUgPF068Qkhe9J4RA4yobprNkvxp SibNnN+H1eSFxoJzwPhnuUIcG4vSSbc/jshr3OiLEApllBMUO66F+DvD74NkyhI4FtqR smyw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1y+TQuiVo3+GUY+iAgshz7SV+RrMtfViD1WZLJbG17gG+W1Pvrqhjl2VWPm6p9bTfWvJwktX2u5EEmYA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id k93mr3875421iod.20.1490977153855; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:19:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Jen Linkova <>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 18:18:53 +0200
Message-ID: <>
To: Khaled Omar <>
Cc: Lee Howard <>, "" <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Fw: Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 16:19:19 -0000

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Khaled Omar
<> wrote:
>> I don¹t see any evidence that you are gaining consensus. Jen¹s suggestion was very good: develop a stack and get some deployment experience to show it can work.
> There are many people who likes IPv10 and support it,

Not on that (or any other IETF) mailing list obviously. I have not
seen any single support message so far but at least ten people told
you that they do not support the idea.

>also I'm not a software developer who works for a company developing an OS,

But you claim that developing/updating software is simple and can be
done very quickly...Well, then you have to find someone who is
supporting your idea and willing to prove that your idea works.

>if you don't believe that this idea works, you have to try it by yourself and get back to me with the result

LOL ;) This thread is getting more and more hilarious.

No, it's not how it works. We don't have to.
If you want you idea to be supported you need to convince the
community that the idea is good and would work. To do this you need
to demonstrate it.
If you are not willing to do that - nobody would support your idea,
IPv10 draft would not move forward and we all go back to deploying

>and what was your problem, maybe you are not good in writing codes or whatever.

I fail to see how our ability/skills in writing code matters in this case.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Howard []
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 5:35 PM
> To: Khaled Omar; Jen Linkova
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Fw: Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.
> On 3/31/17, 10:02 AM, "Int-area on behalf of Khaled Omar"
> < on behalf of> wrote:
>>> So far many people mentioned to you that updating software on clients
>>>and on network devices is very expensive, complicated and slow process.
>>SOFTWARE UPDATES are expensive, complicated and slow process !
> Yes. Years, and hundreds or thousands of hours of expensive labor.
> See where I explained it yesterday at
> And that¹s if we stipulate that this can be done in software, which I don¹t.
> I don¹t see any evidence that you are gaining consensus. Jen¹s suggestion was very good: develop a stack and get some deployment experience to show it can work.
> Lee
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list

SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry