IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] Updated text Re: Please keep context in mind Re: Consensus call -- text reply for ICG proposal review

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Mon, 24 August 2015 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C2B1A8864 for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:04:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 dhawGOJM2lpu for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA65F1A89A9 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:04:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3016; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1440439442; x=1441649042; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=NWgyi/pvjzNc9yBbCp1UX45bU1gSHudkVXJBRVIkkSo=; b=G93rqB4x7PDOd4/KO/BbmOdQXhfFZQKnGtdSbr+9zfOHjsDaIB9eIExe N55ZwXLD1VyY3+aySEmpferyJHbA5ZRWeSFmbyXvs2j8teecaDIYqFDsw UZmqA8y3AII8OyQwGzgqPUxioa9tt008Vu4AfZSpmp2hZCi6bD76fVOk8 I=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 481
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DPBACrW9tV/xbLJq1dh326WIdyAoFrEgEBAQEBAQGBCoQjAQEBAwEjVhALBAEJCgkaBwICDwJGBgEMCAEBiCIIsXyVIAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAReLV4UKB4JpgUMBBJU0gkCBXIhWgUuEMIJ5kVwmgkCBQDyCfwEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,739,1432598400"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="629289279"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Aug 2015 18:03:59 +0000
Received: from [10.61.223.183] ([10.61.223.183]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t7OI3xbL020769; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:03:59 GMT
To: Richard Hill <rhill@hill-a.ch>, "Leslie Daigle (ThinkingCat)" <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>, "Ianaplan@Ietf. Org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>
References: <3A072B1E-FE4C-476E-B6F8-0309F377D221@thinkingcat.com> <55DB487A.2060303@cisco.com> <6f7112a4-4313-4c33-b7d9-a238f01920f8@email.android.com> <55DB4F0E.9000105@cisco.com> <aced0eb7-deed-48e4-85cf-a0ffe55b34aa@email.android.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <55DB5C8E.20406@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 20:03:58 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <aced0eb7-deed-48e4-85cf-a0ffe55b34aa@email.android.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nO8HNbOKCN7Hg3QRIJAoWIbP52WGP9mGh"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/yCptghXs9F7mk9gd3pqbVVbV1tY>
Cc: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Updated text Re: Please keep context in mind Re: Consensus call -- text reply for ICG proposal review
X-BeenThere: ianaplan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <ianaplan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ianaplan/>
List-Post: <mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 18:04:03 -0000


On 8/24/15 7:18 PM, Richard Hill wrote:
> That's not my point. My point is that this group has not considered
> the other parts of the proposal, nor should it.

Andrew has already responded to you on that point.  And some of us
*have* considered the text on the whole.

>
> So this group should not make a comment that can be understood as a
> comment on the other parts of the proposal.

Fundamentally the question is the same: do we believe the proposal
should go forward or not?

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email