Re: Draft of updated WG charter

[vijay gill <vgill@vijaygill.com>]

On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 11:31:24PM +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 9-jan-04, at 18:39, vijay gill wrote:
> 
> >Significant amount of users that are multihomed have a setup that
> >accepts defaults from two providers, and anounces their blocks to
> >both upstreams. They receive no more information than the fact
> >that their connection is up. No routing tables, no prefixes, just
> >a quadzero.
> 
> That's not very smart.

Telling customers that they must spend several thousands of dollars
extra in capital so the IETF thinks they are smart, is not going to
win me much business.

> NAT in IPv6 is of course unacceptable. Firewalls also have the 
> potential to be harmful.

So far, it doesn't appear to have stopped promising local enterpises
from deploying large amounts of firewalls.


We must be on guard against this sort of thinking. Real world meets
powerpoints and wins. Every time.

/vijay