Re: Last Call: draft-arkko-rfc2780-proto-update (IANA Allocation Guidelines for the Protocol Field) to BCP

"Bill Fenner" <fenner@gmail.com> Thu, 08 November 2007 01:21 UTC

Return-path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ipw5Y-0004LD-RP; Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:21:44 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ipw5W-0004HE-S1 for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:21:42 -0500
Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.234]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ipw5T-000269-HO for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:21:42 -0500
Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s8so2414266wxc for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:21:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=Ig79g74r56T9YYUbI4RqR7KAtyRCrhsdTdvDLFoqcBA=; b=cwU193MyUgy8QY4y94ZwWfh79SAuMxqvLTbMfqwipKRuhyJbe4fRTwN6SCsBFTZzfoPcJjQUI1ryPkNpUvumw6pQhsKkSWNAbjy4X/Ty34i+QZKOEW8ZeLKzyEwW2z5i/aL+K5Vi45SUjfUZ4P3ymIZpSDFHrQgek8DHAm1pW2A=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=CeFuoqp3nGqJ3q2Z9fHtPshUkKBsunuvl6oBHAyUAq3fYG6lwOuytBZl+GtrTI4x5FqOr5fkkawU3YZX7TpofU7BTMLBAWD9An6Z5QAeFek/uhSyPqMC+rgBpjp24aTo9mYtMMabQqh3zB51011T2GbqPLoY4flCxSrKWzEE3N8=
Received: by 10.90.92.10 with SMTP id p10mr5759525agb.1194484899240; Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:21:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.90.96.19 with HTTP; Wed, 7 Nov 2007 17:21:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <ed6d469d0711071721o2e60103fgc8c5bdf02bf4cce1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 17:21:39 -0800
From: "Bill Fenner" <fenner@gmail.com>
To: "Bernard Aboba" <aboba@internaut.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711071120410.27519@internaut.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711071120410.27519@internaut.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-arkko-rfc2780-proto-update (IANA Allocation Guidelines for the Protocol Field) to BCP
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On 11/7/07, Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com> wrote:
> Here is a different take on what happened:

...

There are all sorts of takes on what happened.  What I was told at the
time was that the CARP developers picked protocol 112 specifically to
interfere with VRRP, to get back at the IETF for not accepting their
anti-patent position and to show the IETF how irrelevant they were.
My impression was always that the various other stories were
fabricated to cover up that decision.

  Bill

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf