On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 10:58:21PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote: > >> perhaps, but if IETF has the problem that it's not willing to assert its > >> ownership over its own protocols, that problem is better addressed in > >> IETF than in ARIN. > >> > > > > very true. but throwing protocols "over the wall" and > > ignoring operational input does tend to affect the credibility > > and/or the usefulness of said protocol. Or are you suggesting > > that the IETF designs protocols without regard to operational > > relevence? > > > maybe I'm misled but I've never thought of the registries as bodies > whose purpose was to collect operational experience. > > but yes, I'd very much like for IETF to have more input from those > involved in operation, as well as having more input from more > applications developers, as well as having more input from those who > understand architecture, as well as having more input from actual users > or user groups. we need all of those kinds of input. > > Keith as an IETF member, i might suggest that those mountains will not come to you on their own. i will suggest you follow the advice Ray (and others) have given - If you want to understand them and get their input, you have to go to their fora. --bill Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise). _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf