Re: Usage of services without IPv6 Support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello Carsten
Thanks for your input.

Don't you think that not choosing the default choice is just a question of adaptation ? The additional learning is expected and a normal thing I would say.

I guess that putting the fact IPv6 has not been enabled to a particular SaaS as something small should not be the case, not for IETF. Perhaps for a private company it could be the case, but IETF should stand to values and also have focus on giving the example, otherwise why put all the effort in standardize something ? Has anyone done any type of assessment of how much would possible be lost by directing people to use other tools versus how much is lost over the years by people and companies looking that not even IETF is concerned about favoring products with IPv6 ?

Otherwise we will spend another 20 years asking people to adopt IPv6 and having to deal with the growing issues related to legacy IPv4.

Best regards
Fernando

On 19/04/2020 13:03, Carsten Bormann wrote:
On 2020-04-19, at 17:53, Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Can we start with: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/git/about/ ? What type of unique thing GitHub has that justifies continuing using it in detriment to other SaaS that already have full IPv6 support ?
Github has an audience that nobody else has.

If the objective of the github repo is to open communication lines to actual developers; these are overwhelmingly on github; using another service just misses the mark.

For other projects, gitlab etc. work well, too, but do require some additional learning for people who work on more than one project at the time.  There is no institutional bias against those services; I have participated in IETF-related projects both on gitlab and on bitbucket (even with, shudder, mercurial).  It’s just not the default choice.

Note that we are not talking about a company that routinely engages in criminal behavior (you know who I’m talking about; do not discuss this here as it is off-topic), but a service that merely hasn’t got around to enabling IPv6.  This is ugly, but not the original sin.

Grüße, Carsten





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux