IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-stable-privacy-addresses (Respond by Aug 11, 2015)

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> Thu, 06 August 2015 14:30 UTC

Return-Path: <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5C61A87A3 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 07:30:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 pKbKUdI5Kke4 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 07:30:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from web01.jbserver.net (web01.jbserver.net [IPv6:2a00:8240:6:a::1]) (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 182EE1A1B5F for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 07:30:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [84.47.113.16] (helo=[192.168.1.14]) by web01.jbserver.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from <fgont@si6networks.com>) id 1ZNMBQ-0004EU-HP; Thu, 06 Aug 2015 16:30:12 +0200
Message-ID: <55C36F70.9010704@si6networks.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 16:30:08 +0200
From: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
References: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1CB90384@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <55B91127.9020403@gmail.com> <55BB7978.3030805@si6networks.com> <55BFD0E9.7050605@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <55BFD0E9.7050605@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/0rAbXtcsp40PxZGRv_kYZ5ggrEw>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] IETF-93 Follow Up - draft-ietf-dhc-stable-privacy-addresses (Respond by Aug 11, 2015)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2015 14:30:18 -0000

On 08/03/2015 10:36 PM, Tomek Mrugalski wrote:
> 
> Keep in mind that WG consensus is not something set in stone. People
> change their minds over time. More analysis and better understanding of
> a problem is available over time. New solutions are being proposed.
> These all influence people decisions. Work that used to be appealing may
> lose its appeal over time. Successful adoption call answers the question
> whether a WG is willing to work on something, not a promise to publish
> the draft no matter what. Drafts can be abandoned at any stage. It may
> be disappointing when it happens, but it happens nevertheless.

FWIW, I've love to see a "please state whether you want this I-D to be
dropped, and state the reasons for dloing so"..

-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email