Re: [v6ops] Deborah Brungard's Yes on charter-ietf-v6ops-04-01: (with COMMENT)

[Warren Kumari <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Fred Baker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Warren: I need some advice from you on how to proceed. Ben, Spencer, and Deborah have commented and suggested text, and Suresh has suggested an additional charter item.
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-v6ops/ballot/
>
> Ben's suggested text is closest to the meaning I intended. An example of the kind of thing I had in mind was the concept of routing a /64 to a chassis (and routing to it using BGP as opposed to Neighbor Discovery), which is conceptually thought of as having an internal (or tethered) virtual LAN, and the containers or applications having addresses on that LAN. It is not that we have interesting opportunities in dealing with IPv4 networks, as Spencer suggested, but that we have new and operationally interesting network models that might not require the physical host to be different from a router, and might treat a container or an application the way we have treated a host in the past.
>
> Suggested text for the interesting sentence:
>
> NEW:
> IPv6 deployment has resulted in the shutdown of IPv4 in some networks. Removing IPv4 constraints has resulted in innovations in IPv6 network operations.
> END.
>
> To Suresh's comment, the working group has not discussed this amendment, but I suspect would be agreeable to it. We have two drafts in the mill that would align with it.
>
> NEW:
> 5) Document operational requirements for IPv6 networks.
> END.
>

Yeah, I'd suggested (yesterday): "The group will also document basic
requirements for IPv6 CPE", but yours is (IMO) better.

> What do you want me to do?

Nothing -- I specifically hadn't made the changes to the posted text,
because that would create a new version (04-02), and we would lose all
of the current ballots - seeing as we have 5 "Yes" and 5 "NoObj" that
would be sad.

However, your proposed solution for Suresh involves adding a whole new
bullet point, which is (IMO) a significant enough change that it
probably makes sense for a new version to be pushed. I'll explain the
updates and assume that people will be happy to click the ballot
buttons again.
This is the first rechartering I've done, so I'm still feeling my way
around the process...

W



>
>
>> On Apr 25, 2017, at 1:03 PM, Deborah Brungard <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for
>> charter-ietf-v6ops-04-01: Yes
>>
>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>
>>
>>
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-v6ops/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> I still find that last sentence difficult to parse "issues and
>> opportunities from these shutdowns have resulted in
>> innovations in network operation" e.g. if take the first
>> part, "issues in shutdowns resulting in innovations in
>> network operation" is doublespeak. I don't think ops
>> folks see their issues with such rose-colored glasses.
>> And the sentence seems opposite of the charter of the
>> working group, e.g. item #1 and #2, as the charter is
>> about identifying operational issues. If issues resulted
>> in innovations, we wouldn't need this group:-)
>>
>> I'd suggest instead of "selling" the innovations of global
>> deployment in this sentence, rephrase it to be specific
>> on the charter goals. How about:
>> "An important aspect of IPv6 deployment has been the
>> operational issues with the shutdown of IPv4 networks
>> and operational interaction issues with IPv4 networks."
>>
>>
>



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf