On 29 Jul 2017, at 8:19, Ted Lemon wrote:
The reason you know of few people in the IETF who would make that
claim is
that (1) the IETF is actually pretty backwards about trying new
things, for
reasons about which I could speculate, but I'm sure that would be a
bad
idea. And (2) IETFers actually use a lot of stuff that regular users
never use, so we are more likely to run into breakage, e.g. Stephen's
edge
case. We are good people to use for testing edge cases. And I
think
most of us are fine with testing edge cases.
Exactly right. That's why many of us know first-hand that v6 has more
hard-to-describe choices for end users than v4 does.
So I think that "we" is
actually a lot of IETF participants; however, those IETF participants
tend
to avoid the IETF mailing list because discussions like this always
devolve
into politics.
I was not thinking of just people on this mailing list: like you, I talk
to many people at IETF meetings. I find few people who are not strong v6
advocates saying that they think a v6-only is will Just Work for the
average user.
The IETF is in the business of designing new networking protocols.
If we
are so allergic to dogfood that we can't even tolerate it for a week
at a
time three times a year, when there is an easy way to opt out, I think
we
ought to just stop spending millions of tons of carbon every year
flying to
these stupid meetings and go grow turnips or something.
You can choose to do that if you want, of course: it's an individual
choice. My preference is to keep developing networking protocols and
seeing how they help Internet users over time.
--Paul Hoffman