On Feb 2, 2011, at 3:16 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > On 2 feb 2011, at 4:51, Dave Israel wrote: > >> They were features dreamed up by academics, theoreticians, and purists, and >> opposed by operators. > > Contrary to popular belief, the IETF listens to operators and wants them to > participate. Few do. For instance, I don't seem to remember your name from > any IETF mailinglists. (I could be mistaken, though.)
From personal experience, the only reason die-hard IETF folk want operators to participate on IETF lists is so that they can tell them that they're wrong on IETF mailing lists as opposed to operator mailing lists. > Example: if you give administrators the option of putting a router address in > a DHCP option, they will do so and some fraction of the time, this will be > the wrong address and things don't work. If you let routers announce their > presence, then it's virtually impossible that something goes wrong because > routers know who they are. A clear win. Of course it does mean that people > <gasp> have to learn something new when adopting IPv6. Is anyone else reading this and the word "condescending" _not_ popping into their heads?
