Adrian Chadd wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009, Tony Hain wrote: > >> No, the decision was to not blindly import all the excess crap from IPv4. If >> anyone has a reason to have a DHCPv6 option, all they need to do is specify >> it. The fact that the *nog community stopped participating in the IETF has >> resulted in the situation where functionality is missing, because nobody >> stood up and did the work to make it happen. > > Please explain where you think "*nog" community is today representative > at all of the wider scale IPv6 deployment issues across the world? > > I'm assuming IETF and ARIN/RIPE/APNIC/etc are busy talking to end-users > rather than just ISPs about the issues facing IPv6 adoption. Am I > mistaken or not?
The end-users who come too three meetings a year and pay $635 to attend are a small and self-selecting bunch (there are some I would note)... The IETF is not in the business of product development of the sort that end-users would normally relate to. The RIRs have there respective stakeholders, some are end-users most are not. > > > Adrian > >
