Re: [CCAMP] OVRLY - signaling extensions

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 17 March 2014 12:19 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EB2C1A02DA for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 05:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -98.083
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-98.083 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.347, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.77, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=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 z9vm5hwQrXP1 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 05:19:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC6F1A03EF for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 05:19:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2HCJ9EM029836; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:19:09 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (108.26.90.92.rev.sfr.net [92.90.26.108]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2HCJ4Fk029741 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:19:06 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Gabriele Maria Galimberti \(ggalimbe\)'" <ggalimbe@cisco.com>, "'Zhangxian \(Xian\)'" <zhang.xian@huawei.com>, "'John E Drake'" <jdrake@juniper.net>, "=?UTF-8?Q?'Pawe=C5=82_Brzozowski'?=" <PBrzozowski@advaoptical.com>
References: <279301cf41d8$65564e10$3002ea30$@olddog.co.uk> <CF4CA2DB.5AE5B%ggalimbe@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CF4CA2DB.5AE5B%ggalimbe@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:19:06 -0000
Message-ID: <27b201cf41db$198edcb0$4cac9610$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQK1FIkj41sgZAQH8L+V7d1aI3cchpkZi2qg
Content-language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1017-20570.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--6.419-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--6.419-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: csPTYAMX1+E4HKI/yaqRmycP0e8lTEHzUAjrAJWsTe/FpA1uJFd1mm/R SSi3jj998zjjOWUeEE/3Fu9U0LrGNJlqCC5cBrl0BfKxbfcZgymD30L3uxcHwP2TbFr0CGOD0yO PBv1B9Xbd/R78GDAj0Dl4fr3J7TtwuvqRwmuXd3ZT46Ow+EhYOPTWKs29qDlrJCWfr9pMZ4/OEM terKmLMXREXAj8cE0UqNGk+EBf5h+R9GF2J2xqM4MbH85DUZXy3QfwsVk0UbtuRXh7bFKB7h8Uc U/FY5bk1ywAfwiGHiaxWI4azG89RNR2nAGTkIycH8FerAT0dJY=
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/lFlAOXTL6i99D8SF0KWoaP2iAKo
Cc: 'CCAMP' <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] OVRLY - signaling extensions
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:19:33 -0000

> We need to look ahead and use the best for the future   … and We'll DO that !
> But, I'd also say, let me keep my bended solution already working in field.

Right.
I am pretty sure that no-one is disagreeing with this.

One group of people is busy bending things and documenting them, while the other group looks on and says "Urgh! Do you really need to do that?"

The second group is also happily dreaming of the golden future, while the first group says "But you are excluding what is in the field!"

So long as we recognise the difference between pragmatics and idealism we will get both set of documents published.

For my part, I hope that stuff is only being "added to the UNI" when it is really needed, and not because "hey, we could also add a widget" which has been a lamentable flaw with IETF work in recent years.

I also hope that the dreamscape can remain free of a discussion of what we are building for pragmatics, and can concentrate on "how things ought to be" or at least "how things would have been had we started with a green field".

Adrian