>> 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. > I told Ray that I would write up something and send it to ARIN. but I don't see how that will solve the problem of getting more relevant input to IETF. allocation sizes still need to be decided in IETF, not by RIRs. if it's really necessary to give RIRs or ISPs more bits to play with, then IMO there's a good chance that IETF needs to revisit some other IPv6 design decisions. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf