It is a question of ambition. At sixteen I was interested in mastering the computer at its most fundamental level. I wrote arcade games in 6502 and Z80 assembler.
Today the idea of booting linux on a laptop would not make my top ten, hundred or thousand list of must do before I die experiences. In other words I have a life.
I can see the point of creating a drop dead date for the ipv6 world to get its act together and be ready for prime time - including support for dns records servers and the like.
I do not see the point of any test predicated on the assumption that legacy IPv4 devices are upgraded.
Nor do I see any point in any test predicated on the expectation that large numbers of people will ever learn about IPv6 administration.
I know what micrcode is, I have even written some. I know the role of microcode in VLSI design. If I was teaching a comp sci course I would want the students to know all about microcode. That does not mean that I want or need the microcode for my cpu before I program it.
I don't know what lesson will be drawn here. The one I believe should be drawn is that we need to ask what the problem we are really trying to solve is.
Sent from my GoodLink Wireless Handheld (www.good.com)
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2007 02:12 PM Pacific Standard Time
To: Chris Lonvick
Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Change the subject! RE: [IAOC] Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF71 Plenary
Chris Lonvick wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Several people have written on this thread that they might not
> participate in this experiment because they either won't have an IPv6
> stack or that they're unwilling to experiment with the network settings
> on their PCs. I'll suggest that those people can double their
> experimental fun in a very low risk way by booting a live linux
> distribution during the experiment.
While this looks like helpful information, for those able to use it, I think
the point that the core point is still being missed:
Some folks do not have that kind of control over their laptops. They
work for organizations which keep strict control over the software on the
machines and/or the attendee does not happen to be someone who messes around
with changes to their operating system.
While the press for testing IPv6 scenarios and demonstrating how to make many
different ones work is definitely a Good Thing, the coercive quality about the
approach to this particular exercise has an oddly macho tone:
Real Geeks Hack Their Laptops.
In reality, it is entirely reasonable -- and for most of the world, essential
-- for people to distinguish between a production platform and an experimental
one, and to treat their mobile office platform as production.
Given the urgent need to get IPv6 more fully used, there is probably a good
argument for forcing a public event like this (if it goes well... and maybe
even if it doesn't) but we really ought to acknowledge that some attendees are
disenfranchised.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf