On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:36 PM Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> wrote:
> So I'll just say this ... if you think that the advice I received from all of the many people I spoke to (all of whom are/were a lot smarter than me on this topic) was wrong, and that putting the same LOE into IPv6 adoption that it would have taken to make Class E usable was a better investment

Doug,

"Better investment?" What on earth makes you think it's a zero-sum game?

"Same level of effort?" A reasonable level of effort was adding the word "unicast" to the word "reserved" in the standards. Seven letters. A space. Maybe a comma. That would have unblocked everybody else to apply however much or little effort they cared to. Here we are nearly 20 years later and had you not fumbled that ball 240/4 might be broadly enough supported to usefully replace the word "reserved" with something else.

You're right about one thing: you won't be able to convince me that your conclusion was rational. No matter how many smart people say a stupid thing, it's still a stupid thing.

Regards,
Bill Herrin