IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Not a Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ? (was: Re: John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs questions / preferences)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Mon, 26 October 2020 20:30 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B322F3A0EDB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 13:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 EXwYz7IKWZOM for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 13:30:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED5C63A0ED9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 13:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CKmgd75M4zyVx; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:30:53 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Subject: Re: Not a Poll: RFCs with page numbers (pretty please) ? (was: Re: John/rsoc: Re: Page numbers in RFCs questions / preferences)
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <20201026202458.3CE2B24EFC5E@ary.qy>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:30:53 +0100
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 625437053.638499-a5158ad8a9cbc97aeccd981009b6a951
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E8AEA621-CBB8-4FC7-89B2-86AC520EB1A2@tzi.org>
References: <20201026202458.3CE2B24EFC5E@ary.qy>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3dkJ7Fcb0FPk6x0WjNX7PsdVg-s>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 20:30:58 -0000

On 2020-10-26, at 21:24, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> 
> It is certainly very far from my understanding of how the IETF works.

Or from RFC 7282:

      We reject: kings, presidents and voting.

(Famous line from Dave Clark, 1992, of course.)

Then it goes on quoting Dave Clark:

      We believe in: rough consensus and running code.

It is apparent that, with running code now installed and operating, the consensus appears to be rather rough.  (New data, new discussion, I’d say, but I’m not the chair here.)

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email