IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [bmwg] WGLC on New version of draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance

Gábor LENCSE <lencse@hit.bme.hu> Thu, 22 July 2021 20:19 UTC

Return-Path: <lencse@hit.bme.hu>
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 BD2B33A0919 for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 13:19:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Cekp7jTqMyHL for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 13:19:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frogstar.hit.bme.hu (frogstar.hit.bme.hu [IPv6:2001:738:2001:4020::2c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19A303A0914 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 13:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.146] (host-79-121-43-67.kabelnet.hu [79.121.43.67]) (authenticated bits=0) by frogstar.hit.bme.hu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 16MKJKnW026716 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 22:19:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from lencse@hit.bme.hu)
X-Authentication-Warning: frogstar.hit.bme.hu: Host host-79-121-43-67.kabelnet.hu [79.121.43.67] claimed to be [192.168.1.146]
To: bmwg@ietf.org
References: <413e779fd7eb4dd4b3aa8473c171e282@att.com> <02629ACE-FDA4-4ACF-9459-825521596B83@encrypted.net> <001201d75266$05979140$10c6b3c0$@netsecopen.org> <059e01d75f7d$a62a4de0$f27ee9a0$@netsecopen.org> <009b01d76c46$8063e5a0$812bb0e0$@netsecopen.org> <770F93CB-A8CC-4420-8C1B-CB7B7A2289FB@encrypted.net> <021f01d77356$7e19a2f0$7a4ce8d0$@netsecopen.org> <D1ED6898-D8C3-4C56-A3D3-221DD16B7300@encrypted.net> <004701d777f5$94844bf0$bd8ce3d0$@netsecopen.org> <SJ0PR02MB7853CAF5D40CBAFA6C3B4154D3149@SJ0PR02MB7853.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <005201d777fa$2133a100$639ae300$@netsecopen.org> <4e51a7d5-8c59-a4fc-6c65-457ee7655c74@eantc.de> <A0A5D9D5-1D3E-439F-9009-C977BC5EA389@encrypted.net> <00de01d7780e$d2351b50$769f51f0$@netsecopen.org> <43E13361-D7EE-4882-BCF2-6FBAEA0 AAE84@encrypted.net> <01c801d77a71$e64f5190$b2edf4b0$@netsecopen.org> <SJ0PR02MB7853F71A936E525CA6819610D3E49@SJ0PR02MB7853.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <006401d77f2d$85cba290$9162e7b0$@netsecopen.org>
From: Gábor LENCSE <lencse@hit.bme.hu>
Message-ID: <54baf4ae-06c6-8af0-efdf-16fd5870ee79@hit.bme.hu>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 22:19:15 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <006401d77f2d$85cba290$9162e7b0$@netsecopen.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------954585207DF503C6E6E2CBE4"
Content-Language: en-US
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.2 at frogstar.hit.bme.hu
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Received-SPF: pass (frogstar.hit.bme.hu: authenticated connection) receiver=frogstar.hit.bme.hu; client-ip=79.121.43.67; helo=[192.168.1.146]; envelope-from=lencse@hit.bme.hu; x-software=spfmilter 2.001 http://www.acme.com/software/spfmilter/ with libspf2-1.2.10;
X-DCC--Metrics: frogstar.hit.bme.hu; whitelist
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 152.66.248.44
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/dtJar5MZ0G37Hm5lk5L9W4xsRcY>
Subject: Re: [bmwg] WGLC on New version of draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance
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, 22 Jul 2021 20:19:37 -0000


2021.07.22. 21:12 keltezéssel, bmonkman@netsecopen.org írta:
> We would prefer to not use the term “modern” as it isn’t really an 
> industry recognized term.

What about "state-of-the-art" or perhaps "contemporary"?

I am just trying to find a synonym, that is acceptable for both Sarah 
and the Authors. I myself am OK, with "next-generation", too. I feel all 
of them (including "modern") as "dated", and I think they all likely to 
mean "obsolete" in 10 or 20 years.

Best regards,

Gábor

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email