Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > The problem is not merely marketing in the sense of messaging. The problem > with each one of the stalled IETF infrastructure upgrades is deployment > deadlock. > > Specifically there is a cycle of ungranted requests. Alice has no incentive > to upgrade her infrastructure because she cannot use any new feature until > Bob upgrades. Meanwhile Bob has no incentive to upgrade ahead of Alice. > > Mere exhortations from the great and the good have very limited effect. It's interesting to note that, with monopoly by telco, deployment of ITU standards was almost automatic. However, on the Internet with full competitive backbone and the end to end principle, upgrading has been occurring from the end. For example, ftp servers and clients are upgraded to web servers and clients at the ends without any changes to the backbone. Subnetting was an issue within end sites. NAT is another example. > What I want as a consumer is a box that enables me to do things like peer to > peer video chat efficiently and without all my traffic going in and out of > some peer to peer network whose real function is no more than NAT bypass. Upgrading NAT boxes in consumer houses and edge ISPs by end to end NAT gives you the environment you want. Masataka Ohta _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf