MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <172176385611.611136.3361111887074779612@dt-datatracker-659f84ff76-9wqgv>
 <CAJhXr986yXVysGf6QQLvWYudQMYf+zMQ3BJrrNaj7L6hfu1xjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABNhwV1dspJRUZ15eX0sWupEAg+pLAp-3GMA5dEKF-X04MwQRw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABNhwV0zP5C2uCcki=g7WDb_0Aqs8Q=15SV1r8yNM3E7-b+fVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <eb8789d5-dab1-af90-b40a-672d27d26198@foobar.org>
In-Reply-To: <eb8789d5-dab1-af90-b40a-672d27d26198@foobar.org>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 07:23:39 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CABNhwV0Xe5jKASA6D8JJB_hpdUr3MbspMwJWPXrFhjYuCdLKgA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000050c6db0622630a48"
Message-ID-Hash: X74WAMWTJXA3GS4MBOFMVCA7ZPE6YY5B
CC: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Precedence: list
Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5Bv6ops=5D_Re=3A_Fwd=3A_=5BE=5D_New_Version_Notification_for_draf?=
	=?utf-8?q?t-mishra-v6ops-variable-iids-problem-statement-01=2Etxt?=
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/c-1ynS2yJVYEVan5RFHDj8We-8o>

--00000000000050c6db0622630a48
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks Nick for a voice of reason and my arguments exactly when it was
first brought up years ago and seems to keep coming back.

Thanks

Gyan


On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 4:37 AM Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:

> Gyan Mishra wrote on 18/09/2024 00:15:
> > Issue -#2 Race to bottom
> >
> > Lorenzo Colitti and few others brought up up race to the bottom with th=
e
> > /80 that ISPs would adjust to /80 as their new allocation.  Lorenzo kep=
t
> > saying that ISPs would try to push to move the IID  further shorter wit=
h
> > this move opened door to race all the way down which didn=E2=80=99t mak=
e
> > sense to me.
>
> There's no actual evidence that supports the race to the bottom
> argument. It might sound plausible but in reality it's entirely
> speculative. I don't see that it has a place as an actual argument for
> or against anything in an IETF working group.
>
> Nick
>

--00000000000050c6db0622630a48
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Thanks Nick for a voice of reason and my a=
rguments exactly when it was first brought up years ago and seems to keep c=
oming back.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Thanks=C2=A0=
</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Gyan</div><div><br></di=
v><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr"=
>On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 4:37 AM Nick Hilliard &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:nick@f=
oobar.org">nick@foobar.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gma=
il_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-lef=
t:1ex">Gyan Mishra wrote on 18/09/2024 00:15:<br>
&gt; Issue -#2 Race to bottom<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Lorenzo Colitti and few others brought up up race to the bottom with t=
he <br>
&gt; /80 that ISPs would adjust to /80 as their new allocation.=C2=A0 Loren=
zo kept <br>
&gt; saying that ISPs would try to push to move the IID =C2=A0further short=
er with <br>
&gt; this move opened door to race all the way down which didn=E2=80=99t ma=
ke <br>
&gt; sense=C2=A0to me.<br>
<br>
There&#39;s no actual evidence that supports the race to the bottom <br>
argument. It might sound plausible but in reality it&#39;s entirely <br>
speculative. I don&#39;t see that it has a place as an actual argument for =
<br>
or against anything in an IETF working group.<br>
<br>
Nick<br>
</blockquote></div></div>

--00000000000050c6db0622630a48--