Hello Ben
You actually have a very point.
However I don't think it applies the very same way as IPv6. NFSv4 for
example is not an relevant protocol for Internet, is not something that
is exposed publicly, the same as OSPF. If IETF uses them it's on
internal infrastructure and no exposed to external knowledge so it is
harder to use the same argument when I say show the example. With
regards the others mentioned, perhaps, need to see if it applies on a
case or not, for example QUIC.
IPv6 instead applies to ALL cases, any situation that involves internet,
has been around for 20 years and the continuous and healthy growth of
the Internet depends on it, including to mitigate growing issues and
conflicts related to IPv4 exhaustion. It is not something 'nice to have
if possible anymore' that can continue being disregarded.
Kind Regards
Fernando
On 21/04/2020 22:36, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
Hi Fernando,
There is a point that's been grating on me for the entire thread but I had
trouble finding a good way to express it:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:19:46PM -0300, Fernando Frediani wrote:
Hello
I am not sure if you followed the whole discussion of if you have seen
only this message, but this has been already clarified that it's not
about Github specifically and that document. As mentioned there are
other cases, and other tools that do not go under the same process.
It's instead about IETF keep using any tools that have not done their
part in implementing IPv6 on it yet. It's about showing the example, not
just get the work done regardless. I know some people are more pragmatic
and just want to get work out of their way, but I personally believe
sticking to values in this situation is indeed important. What good is
it if IETF standardizes things if some people don't bother if they will
be adopted and followed or not ?
Couldn't I make this same argument about *any* IETF standard? Do we need
to reject services that don't implement TLS 1.3 or NFSv4 or QUIC or OSPF
(v2 or v3?) or ...?
Bjoern made (upthread) a much more compelling argument about why IPv6
specifically is so important, and I think you're doing yourself a
disservice by using only the "it's an IETF standard" argument.
Sorry for the digression,
Ben
