RE: IPv6 adoption - IPv10 is the future.

[Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Erik,

 

I think we need to re-discuss it and I promise I’ll take all points into consideration in a new version of the draft.

 

Khaled Omar

 

From: Erik Kline <ek.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 9:12 PM
To: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ross Finlayson <finlayson@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>; ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: IPv6 adoption - IPv10 is the future.

 

The temperature on this _whole thread_ does indeed need to drop several (tens of) degrees.

 

Khaled,

 

If memory serves, there was previously a round of discussion on IPv10 within intarea.  If you have a new version of the document (one that ideally incorporates some feedback to address points raised during that discussion) then it's appropriate to state as much in that context and solicit new feedback.

 

-Erik

 

On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 11:42 AM Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Wow, what an asshole you are. 



> On 09/21/2022 2:30 PM EDT Ross Finlayson <finlayson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 
> > On Sep 21, 2022, at 12:23 PM, Tom Beecher <beecher@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > I don’t know why till now the IETF didn’t take the IPv10 draft seriously into consideration
> >
> > You would likely get some benefit reviewing this document : https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/tao/
>
> And also this document:       https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect