Functioning of 6man (was: Re: Apology)

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
> --------------------------------------------------------------------