[lir-wg] Discussion about RIPE-261

>>

This is way off-topic and I apologies for this.

>> Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
>> Agreed. The flaws of IPv6 comes down to not solving the
>> multihomign/routing scaling/world starvation problem.
>> That is an IETF problem, and there is a WG for it.
>
> For the record, and the following are verifiable _facts_: the IRTF and
> the IETF have been working on this problem for the last ten years.

No one will disagree with you. The multi6 WG have certainly not  
delivered and that is not a secret. There are a number of reasons for  
that. However, I took over as co-chair with one of the goals to make it  
move forward, and we seem to be starting.

In order to make your mail somewhat fair, it is also worth pointing out  
that to my knowledge Michel disagrees with multi6, and thinks it should  
be closed down. I am not clear on what you want to do instead to solve  
the problem except your own MHAP proposal. Michel started his own  
mailinglist, which AFAI can tell have not reach any more consensus than  
multi6 have.


> One
> of the Area Directors responsible for the multi6 WG has called it the
> "Titanic". By Kurtis' own account it is going to be 5 to 10 more years
> before they find a solution, if they do.

You are now putting words in my mouth. I said that it would take us  
5-10 years before we have a solution widely deployed. The same goes for  
most solutions I have seen proposed.

>  The WG that Kurtis co-chairs
> has not even agreed to _requirements_ that were due two years ago; they
> are calling it recommendations now with zero proposals on the table.

I am not sure we have been reading the same mailinglist, but the  
current discussions are around how to limit the number of proposals and  
how to group them. If you like it or not, a solution to the multi6  
problem will require an overall architecture. And that needs to fit  
with the rest of the Internet and what is going on in genereal.

>
> Anyone that wants to have a glimpse of what the IETF is going to do for
> them is encouraged to read Kurtis' own draft:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kurtis-multihoming- 
> longprefix-
> 00.txt
>

Picking out one single personal draft does not say anything about what  
the IETF will do for anyone.

I have never said this proposal is perfect, far from it.

Michel have his own personal opinion and agenda. That is fine. I prefer  
disagreeing with Michel working on his own proposal outside the IETF  
and getting it implemented and not standardized instead of people not  
working on this problem at all.


- kurtis -

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 174 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/lir-wg/attachments/20030528/d8d66615/attachment.sig>