Vendors are not required to lie when claiming IPv6 support. > On Dec 5, 2018, at 5:38 AM, Gert Doering <gert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 04:31:17AM -0800, Joe Touch wrote: >>> On Dec 5, 2018, at 4:21 AM, Gert Doering <gert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 04:13:47AM -0800, Joe Touch wrote: >>>> Then THAT is the security issue. Not the packets that cause a broken implementation to have problems. >>> >>> Can we declare folks at IETF that have no idea about operational realities >>> to be a security issue? >> >> As long as we can do the same for operators that blame protocols for vendor issues. > > If a protocol cannot be implemented in a way that can be paid by real world > participants, it's not a vendor issue. > > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 > _______________________________________________ > Tsv-art mailing list > Tsv-art@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art
