RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?

Well said.

From: Andrew Alston [mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 7:26 AM
To: Bernier, Daniel <daniel.bernier@bell.ca>; Voyer, Daniel <daniel.voyer@bell.ca>; Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>; otroan@employees.org; Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Cc: 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?

Not proposing any such thing.

Am questioning if we are seeing a growth in participation – or a blatant stacking of the floor with people who have never set foot on the lists and will never will again.

Similar to the floor of +1’s we saw on something else a while back – where – once I took the list of all of them – and ran through an analytics script – had never posted to any archive I could find – and have never posted since.

Encourage participation – yes – encourage blatant floor stacking for the purpose of saying “I support this” and disappearing into the woodwork – no – there is a big difference

Andrew

From: ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Bernier, Daniel
Sent: Thursday, 28 May 2020 17:23
To: Voyer, Daniel <daniel.voyer@bell.ca<mailto:daniel.voyer@bell.ca>>; Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com<mailto:Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>>; otroan@employees.org<mailto:otroan@employees.org>; Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com<mailto:markzzzsmith@gmail.com>>
Cc: 6MAN <6man@ietf.org<mailto:6man@ietf.org>>
Subject: RE: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?

+1 to my colleagues comment

Moreover, every open community thrives at trying to grow and add new active participants, committers (just look at the IETF Hackathons attendees growth).
It would be counter-intuitive if WG were actually proposing the opposite.

Thanks,
Dan B

On 2020-05-28, 10:11 AM, "ipv6 on behalf of Voyer, Daniel" <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of daniel.voyer@bell.ca<mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org%20on%20behalf%20of%20daniel.voyer@bell.ca>> wrote:

Hello Fred,

I too, come from the real-world, the operator side which implies wireline & wireless network. It's pretty awesome that you have an aviation hat though, I can't claim that I have a "drone hat" .. just yet.

But with this new ecosystem where we try to have an end-to-end type architecture, from access network, to metro and core network and try to adapt to a 5G/MEC, I believe we are redefining boundaries between domains. What's happening in 6man AND SPRING working group just reflect those new changes. New contributors coming in is not just happening to those 2 working group, there's also new contributors showing at DMM wg, and there's wireline folks attending 3GPP (not just related to segment routing). Proposing to "reject" or "treat" new contributors separately makes an "us and them" type of relationship and it's not good for reaching a form of consensus.

Regards,
dan

On 2020-05-28, 9:54 AM, "ipv6 on behalf of Templin (US), Fred L" <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com<mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org%20on%20behalf%20of%20Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>> wrote:

Ole,

> 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.

I am representing real-world use cases (planes, trains and automobiles) with my
aviation hat on. I do not work for a network equipment vendor and do not have
company influences driving my decisions. I think this flood of people coming into
6man many for the first time is bad for the 6man technical process and may
interfere with the timely need for solutions to real world problems. I trust that
the chairs will recognize what is going on and make the right decisions.

Thanks - Fred

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of otroan@employees.org<mailto:otroan@employees.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 5:12 AM
> To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com<mailto:markzzzsmith@gmail.com>>
> Cc: 6MAN <6man@ietf.org<mailto:6man@ietf.org>>
> Subject: Re: So where have all these new 6man WG people come from?
>
> 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 <markzzzsmith@gmail.com<mailto:markzzzsmith@gmail.com>> 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
> > ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
> > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
External Email: Please use caution when opening links and attachments / Courriel externe: Soyez prudent avec les liens et documents joints

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org<mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------