Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from? Thu, 28 May 2020 12:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B623E3A0DF0 for <>; Thu, 28 May 2020 05:11:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gZKVNuWQaXBr for <>; Thu, 28 May 2020 05:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A13D3A0DED for <>; Thu, 28 May 2020 05:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E57424E11B40; Thu, 28 May 2020 12:11:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1B6B35B25D7; Thu, 28 May 2020 14:11:50 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
Subject: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 14:11:50 +0200
Cc: 6MAN <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Mark Smith <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 12:11:58 -0000

Segment Routing (CRH, SRH and friends) isn't something 6man has traditionally dealt with.
We have been more concerned about IPv6 in the open Internet, end to end, and not so much of technologies only applicable within a controlled domain.

From that perspective, it is not surprising that this work attracts a different participant-set than before.

It seems that a proxy war is being fought out in the working group.
With both opponents and proponents of proposals closely aligned along company borders.

Best regards,
Ole, with the dystopian hat on.

> On 28 May 2020, at 13:23, Mark Smith <> wrote:
> I've been an active participant in the ipng, 6man and v6ops IETF working groups since 2002. 
> While I've only been to one IETF meeting in person since then (106, sponsored by the Internet Society), over that time I've come to recognise the names of many of the regular and active participants in these IPv6 working groups.
> I do not recognise many of the names of people who are objecting to the 6man working group adopting the CRH draft.
> Those who have been active 6man participants in recent years would know that even an ID adopted by 6man, written by Bob and Brian, that had a number of revisions, didn't survive WG last call, and that occurred while Bob was (as he still is) one of the 6man WG chairs.
> Regards,
> Mark.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> Administrative Requests:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------