reported from tonight's iitf iab (internet archetecture board)
plenary. proclaimed by an esteemed iab member from the podium:
"it is bad in the long term to add hierarchy to routing"
this will save a lot of work. whew!
randy
url for the stream? i -have- to see this ...
--bill
"it is bad in the long term to add hierarchy to routing"
url for the stream? i -have- to see this ...
reported verbatim separately by two friends who have routing
clue but not enough clue to stay away from the iitf. so you
may just have to wait.
but it will be a classic. if you can get and edit it, send
it to boing boing or /.
randy
Maybe Bob Braden's presentaion in e2e task group could
do some help.
In fact, they just start to discusss what will be the
next generation architecture, but does not reach
agreement at all.
http://www.isi.edu/~braden/e2e-tf/braden.newarch.ppt
Joe
btw, for another great giggle (many thanks to brian candler
for reporting it)
From the documentation for Cisco's VPN client software for
Linux:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps2308/products_user_guide_chapter09186a0080234617.html
"User profiles [which contain all your IPSEC parameters:
pre-shared key, username and password] reside in the
/etc/CiscoSystemsVPNClient/Profiles/ directory. Leave the
permissions for the Profiles folder set at drwxrwxrwx.
Each profile in the Profiles folder should have the
follwoing permissions: -rw-rw-rw-."
i think we may have hit an elbow in the entropy curve. heat
death of the internet predicted. news at 11:00 gmt.
randy
Bill,
I was there at the IAB plenary. I am afraid that the above quote was inaccurate and out of the context.
Lixia
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> writes:
but it will be a classic. if you can get and edit it, send
it to boing boing or /.
Pearls before swine.
In my rss aggregator, boingboing and /. are labeled "a Directory for
Dilettantes" and "News for Goobers" respectively.
---Rob
but it will be a classic. if you can get and edit it, send
it to boing boing or /.Pearls before swine.
that's what a number of i* members have publicly stated is their
opinion of talking to us operators. i saved in my mementos the
following quote from an ipv6 architect and current iab member,
"operators won't accept the h ratio because they don't know what
a logarithm is."
In my rss aggregator, boingboing and /. are labeled
i.e. you read them
personally i find doctorow on boing boing often quite fun. /.
has high n:s but not all that much higher than this forum. and
i suspect i would count this message as n. apologies.
randy
None that I have spoken with. What I hear continually is that people would like operational viewpoints on what they're doing and are concerned at the fact that operators don't involve themselves in IETF discussions.
Randy Bush wrote:
but it will be a classic. if you can get and edit it, send
it to boing boing or /.Pearls before swine.
that's what a number of i* members have publicly stated is their
opinion of talking to us operators. i saved in my mementos the
following quote from an ipv6 architect and current iab member,
"operators won't accept the h ratio because they don't know what
a logarithm is."
I'd like to see that. Should prove good fodder for quotes on slides.
/vijay <-- winner of several math prizes
None that I have spoken with. What I hear continually is that people
would like operational viewpoints on what they're doing and are
concerned at the fact that operators don't involve themselves in IETF
discussions.
Agreed, but it is pretty clear that serious
communication/image/respect/etc challenges remain. That
is why the current IAB took a step, albeit a small step,
towards trying to change that by opening up the
communication channels a bit. As I seem to become fond of
saying, "its a first step, but you have to start
somewhere".
I'm hoping (and pushing) that we keep moving in this
direction. As always, we can all educate each other a
bit, and some of that happened at the NANOG BOF. However,
much more is needed. To that end, I've applied for a slot
at APRICOT for the IAB so we can keep what momentum we
gained from the NANOG BOF going.
Finally, if folks have suggestions as to how to make these
(communication) channels more useful, work better, etc
(including suggestions for issues you'd like to talk to
the IAB about or hear the IAB talk about), please let me
know.
Dave
n Nov 11, 2005, at 6:03 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
None that I have spoken with.
that's what a number of i* members have publicly stated is their
opinion of talking to us operators.
i imagine you speak with the one i was quoting rather often,
though you were not there when it was said. i was. ask
others who were there, pitsburgh ietf, a meeting between
ipv6 chairs, iesg members, rirs, and a few ops. a current
member of the iab specifically said, and i quote again,
since you seem to have missed the rest of my paragraph,
operators won't accept the h ratio because they don't
know what a logarithm is.
while the ietf mouths a lot of words about wanting to hear
from, and get participation from, operators, the actual
experience is pretty brutal.
http://rip.psg.com/~randy/051000.ccr-ivtf.html is from the
current issue of acm sigcomm's ccr, where aaron falk also
has a piece. i play curmudgeon and he pollyanna.
randy
yes, a specific member of the IAB said that. A few moments ago, I was chatting with the chair of the IAB, who wondered out loud whether he had noticed everyone else on the IAB edging away from him (something about lightning strikes emanating from the dagger-eyes of fellow IAB members I think) and observing that in the viewpoint he was on his own.
But your comment was not "PN, member of the IAB, said something clueless that the rest of the IAB disagreed with", nor did your subsequent comment
but it will be a classic. if you can get and edit it, send it to boing boing or /.
Pearls before swine.
that's what a number of i* members have publicly stated is their opinion of talking to us operators.
distinguish between the IAB, the IESG, the IETF, ISOC, and or any of the other acronyms that start with the letter I.
Yes, the experience of communicating between groups with different expertise can be brutal, and the brutality goes both directions. A classic example relates to discussions I have with various military agencies and developing countries on their issues, and when I pursue solutions to same get comments from some members of this community (note the lack of broad-brush over-generalization) that "we don't need that so it is a stupid idea". Well, if one is running a static fiber core and has effectively infinite bandwidth everywhere with very high reliability, it probably is. It's hard to run fiber to a geosynchronous satellite - that's a lot of glass, at a minimum.
I would suggest that we drop the overgeneralizations, in which "PN" becomes "The I*", drop the disrespectful associations ("pearls before swine"), and drop the tone. Guys, we're all in this together, and it would be better if we spent a nanosecond thinking about how to get along.
[ many folk may wish to skip to the *** ]
yes, a specific member of the IAB said that.
and we have let their name live in peace. and my message made
it very clear that it was one member speaking.
wondered out loud whether he had noticed everyone else on the
IAB edging away from him (something about lightning strikes
emanating from the dagger-eyes of fellow IAB members I think)
and observing that in the viewpoint he was on his own.
actually, i was hoping that there was a coherent vision behind
the provocative statement that the speaker would be willing to
share with nanog and work on developing. the ops community is
absolutely *desperate* for a real vision of how we move forward
for the long term in addressing and routing with realistic
technologies and actually viable transition strategies. and we
sure have not seen them yet.
but it will be a classic. if you can get and edit it, send it to
boing boing or /.Pearls before swine.
that's what a number of i* members have publicly stated is their
opinion of talking to us operators.distinguish between the IAB, the IESG, the IETF, ISOC, and or
any of the other acronyms that start with the letter I.
fred, you're talking to someone who was stupid enough to waste
a dozen years of his life tilting at those very windmills. i
have been attacked as a clueless operator, and heard operators
as a class denigrated, by each and every one of them [0].
apologies that i did not have the bad taste to keep other than
the most amusing quotes.
Guys, we're all in this together, and it would be better if
we spent a nanosecond thinking about how to get along.
we have spent decades trying to get along, and will continue to
do so. we don't have a choice, as we're all in the same
bathtub. but in my experience, there are very different goal
sets, means of achieving them, etc. and whitewashing over the
problems with "let's play nice," "be a team player," and
"charlene is not playing nice and there is no real problem,"
just makes the problems fester longer and deeper and makes them
worse when they inevitably force their way to the surface and
explode.
denial may not be just a river in egypt, but the erosion is
serious in all its instantiations.
That is exceptionally good news!
It follows that all IPv6 assignments for end-users can therefore be a /64... 
/John
have been attacked as a clueless operator, and heard operators
as a class denigrated, by each and every one of them [0].randy
---
[0] - just yesterday, i wore my "bottom feeding scum sucker"
tee shirt from ivtf, i think, summer '95.
mar1996 - Los Angeles.
CIDRd working group. only a dozen such shirts ever were
printed. (altho i still have the artwork). operators
can poke fun at themselves... the only non-op to get
a shirt has passed on.
--bill
"bridge where you can, route where you must." -- i forgot where this
came from? Radia?
ARP. ARP. arp,arp,arp,arp.... <bcast storm>.
--bill
CIDRd working group.
ahh yes. a memorable period of openness, cooperation, and
respect for operators in the ivtf community.
i still have the artwork
i always loved the baby diaper yellow shirt color far more
than the barely decipherable koi on the back. great color!
<http://rip.psg.com/~randy/051111.bfss-tee>
that and a deep orange nanog tee are two of my fave plain
ones. but the nanog eugene dead/keasey set has to be the
best of all. ymmv.
randy
but please don't plan yet another "the wonderful things the
ivtf is doing in area x."
Actually, that is not at all what I had intened or
planned, and if it came across that way then to some
extent we failed. In any event, I do appreciate this
feedback.
try something more like "what are
the most critical forward problems and what are the deployment,
transition, and use constraints on possible approaches?"
Excellent suggestions. Much appreciated.
Thanks,
Dave
"bridge where you can, route where you must." -- i forgot where this
came from? Radia?
Cabletron