Subject: slaac-renum: Food for thought (Fwd: Re: [v6ops] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum)

From: Fernando Gont <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 12:51:11 -0300

Folks,

Most people agree with this, but.... the reminder is always welcome.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [v6ops] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:15:56 +0200
From: Sander Steffann <[email-masked]>
To: Owen Delong <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]

> However, this still hinges on the assumption that ISPs will behave in the manner you describe. I remain unconvinced that will be the case.

This

And refusing to help those whose ISP doesn't behave like you would like 
them to is making it even worse. This WG needs to grow up and realise 
that we don't live in a perfect world. We should work towards making it 
better for the users, not shunning those whose ISP doesn't confirm to 
our dreams.

The internet is a for-profit system these days, and despite how much I 
dislike it, we need to provide incentives for ISPs to do things the 
right way. Hurting the poor users who don't have any 
knowledge/choice/etc is the wrong way to do that. Same as with the 
Android DHCPv6 disaster: it's hurting the wrong people. We need to work 
on standards and tools to make it better, not making it worse for those 
who cannot help it.

Cheers,
Sander