Re: Functioning of 6man (was: Re: Apology)

I agree that "making sure that IPv6 protocol doesn't change" is not the
goal. But there is some of that. I do think that one important role of 6man
is to preserve the IPv6 design from change requests by operators that do
not have enough (or, in some cases, any) real-world experience with
deploying it. If we don't do that, we'll end up with a copy of IPv4, just
because it's what everybody knows.

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:35 PM Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> wrote:

> Renaming this thread.
>
> And just as a note, I think more than me find references to “real world
> requirements” a little taxing.
> It insinuates that some people live in the real world, and understand
> what’s going on there, and some others aren’t.
> While reality is probably more along the lines of lots of paralell
> universes with somewhat conflicting requirements… ;-)
>
> Cheers,
> Ole
>
> > On 26 Feb 2019, at 16:35, Jan Zorz - Go6 <jan@go6.si> wrote:
> >
> > Dear @all,
> >
> > On 25/02/2019 09:37, Ole Troan wrote:> 6man is a long lived working
> group, tasked with maintaining the IPv6
> >> specifications. That’s different from the typical IETF working group.
> >> Perhaps it is time to have a wider debate about how the working group
> >> should function and what it’s role should be.
> >
> > This is an important discussion to have. Can we define first what
> exactly "maintaining the IPv6 specifications" mean?
> >
> > Is this about being a guardian making sure that IPv6 protocol doesn't
> change? IPv6 was defined many many years ago and meanwhile the reality of
> networking architectures and deployments changed a lot...
> >
> > In my mind, protocol development should go in circles...
> >
> > Protocol development and standardization (IETF) -> Vendors
> implementation in HW/SW -> Operators deployment in networks -> Feedback
> from real world back to IETF from operators (through vendors or direct) ->
> IETF adjusts protocol to real world requirements -> Vendors -> etc...
> >
> > Where did things go wrong? Why? Did they go wrong in first place? ;)
> >
> > Cheers, Jan
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> > ipv6@ietf.org
> > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>