IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bmwg] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Thu, 03 February 2022 13:47 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F3633A1858; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 05:47:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mM0c6yLYXm15; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 05:47:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7C3C3A1851; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 05:47:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:3483:e6e7:fbe7:7efc]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1FAD1D4349; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 15:47:07 +0200 (EET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1643896027; bh=VY11USssr0n2XDh0/JGhPjMfVPgBdSwAQSMrhn3o1cM=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=OCKIhesaJBZ+RbtjZFgaClFRyI5zRws1JwV589qiJkUn6RYlaa6MszxhH6Ogc3x4v S6gq1avVAh0whlafVMciCFImzFHumFsK+AfO3gBjZyUqzR6A6jZiQEHFtaGzzy5YVK m+z5jCN3Bo4QJqtrxFRttEgI3uEf9oV227gJjxvo=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E806B868-E3A3-47EA-BB73-D98594C3807B"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\))
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <4577910f-8baf-515a-a311-0cd6323b02d9@eantc.de>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 15:47:07 +0200
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Al Morton <acm@research.att.com>, bmwg-chairs@ietf.org, bmwg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance@ietf.org
Message-Id: <3B962956-21BF-4401-BF55-FAAF26DBBDBB@eggert.org>
References: <164389483595.7574.18257406920942796923@ietfa.amsl.com> <4577910f-8baf-515a-a311-0cd6323b02d9@eantc.de>
To: Carsten Rossenhoevel <cross@eantc.de>
X-MailScanner-ID: C1FAD1D4349.A64E4
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/3VLzkar9hdAqzpjaMJmd1-LZwTY>
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bmwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 13:47:23 -0000

Hi Carsten,

On 2022-2-3, at 15:41, Carsten Rossenhoevel <cross@eantc.de> wrote:
> I think it is a moot point to respond to your comments.
> 
> As author who has been available for discussions and reviews of this draft across more than three years, not speaking about my professional background as CTO of an independent test lab having dealt with telecom network testing for more than 25 years, I personally feel that your comments are highly disrespectful.
> 
> This kind of review is not appropriate.  In case you'd like to say we need to take our work to another SDO, just plainly say that you don't want to deal with it.

I'm sorry if you have understood my review comments as some sort of personal attack. I'd appreciate it if you would let me know which parts you found disrespectful?

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email