IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> Fri, 31 March 2017 15:35 UTC

Return-Path: <lee@asgard.org>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BFC31299D5 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.395
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.395 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9oUtPrduicCM for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from atl4mhob07.registeredsite.com (atl4mhob07.myregisteredsite.com [209.17.115.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E43129A0A for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.71.211]) by atl4mhob07.registeredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v2VFZJ0k008385 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Mar 2017 11:35:19 -0400
Received: (qmail 6536 invoked by uid 0); 31 Mar 2017 15:35:19 -0000
X-TCPREMOTEIP: 31.133.145.251
X-Authenticated-UID: lee@asgard.org
Received: from unknown (HELO ?31.133.145.251?) (lee@asgard.org@31.133.145.251) by 0 with ESMTPA; 31 Mar 2017 15:35:18 -0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.2.170228
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:35:13 -0500
From: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>, Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
CC: "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <D503E0B7.74E23%lee@asgard.org>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Fw: Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.
References: <D502B93A.74992%lee@asgard.org> <AM4PR0401MB224189BDD22CD327CF280AA3BD340@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1703310806130.30226@uplift.swm.pp.se> <1d67d033-8a0f-c7eb-ae37-ec99f5a34660@kit.edu> <AM4PR0401MB2241FCE296DCD88D7D065520BD370@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S35umePtAb-noP_CiXOh9Kf8j00oCVPSevci6EE9fyxTqQ@mail.gmail.com> <AM4PR0401MB2241D2A7F373B24116E999BCBD370@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <CAFU7BAS6qVBHNFjz0Lzs0m5JnC_ZvmWg_7MU6+6-VnMMPi1Z9w@mail.gmail.com> <AM4PR0401MB22418580403CD59795AF3B0FBD370@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM4PR0401MB22418580403CD59795AF3B0FBD370@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/AJIMchghKZYW6J_Hg9MJgVCwVuE>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Fw: Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 15:35:37 -0000


On 3/31/17, 10:02 AM, "Int-area on behalf of Khaled Omar"
<int-area-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com> 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
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area/current/msg05589.html

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email