Re: myth of the great transition (was US Defense Department forma lly adopts IPv6)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> Does this seem like a weird position for an IAB member to take?
> I don't think so. 

I think economics provides useful tools for talking about
and evaluating this stuff, too, but I think it's pretty
evident that you can optimize for anything you like and get
different results.  I question whether it's in this
organization's charter to privilege the individual user over
the good of the network.  If you choose to put yourself
behind a NAT that's possibly good for you (although I think
it's bad for you over the longer term) and always bad for
the people who want to reach you.

> There certainly are cases where it's appropriate for the IETF to say
> that something users want to do is not OK. Most of those cases are
> ones where their behavior has negative external effects on everyone
> else. I don't think a strong argument has been made that this is
> such a case.

That last sentence left me speechless, for which I suppose
some number of people are now in your debt.

Melinda


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]