IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dtn-interest] DTNWG proposal is a terribly bad idea

Vint Cerf <vint@google.com> Sat, 19 July 2014 12:29 UTC

Return-Path: <vint@google.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34C511B27F6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 05:29:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.379
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.379 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 PXIIJV-rhMsf for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 05:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22d.google.com (mail-oi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D23081B2804 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 05:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-f45.google.com with SMTP id e131so2385790oig.4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 05:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=zarrbwoQkBJ54sXNwo0cTrk0rXoswK/lRrmK3RL0beI=; b=duHWoXkMkeDJhFAzj0ouxGd++IKHxT/zAHnd3mguazvlhUQnS5MbtKbolC0pSzie/T SyAno9oh5kKhi2rHsxFZ6mb9l8NDJ3BXXp67NIBybcPSfKPJq8JWMkZBFMn9pEfyIMF7 asfx6ioVoj9IL+CfmwI4n8Ov7/Ep0d17ooVXC2oPJ5IZIxk1ZGjdMmfnlN3J+JLAlTfP mhZkTstbKZCrZVaAzYAS5w5Va3rh2iz+sLTkDMOqOM/+k1uKSF8Wr8stvd1LLsofjy/y ijmDfydq+G4xvXl97eomhTET345Tyzgr4dLGHvyC5y6vTNY5tbSuf6U/AGFYkjhAPLfk UW1g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=zarrbwoQkBJ54sXNwo0cTrk0rXoswK/lRrmK3RL0beI=; b=TWkhLhDGAZaS7Dzd+fKsSPq5NeXPKhysqn4RfjZpjEpO9XKq4RHbnXcBHqCcxB1dV3 2AE93Q6zh6Rto6tJyTGCboIdXZEc+qfrc4b2ZdDIFNX968xw9gq+iemxzd32pcfTvtDH rqjQtkInrD6mI6gMXmQZZ9YjgkNIdhg1FXS2yyiXvzLpcwcBS5wBVEYCF1qyrfhPZyYN bIBhSShCg2UVbxPkGpuesWLMKAYki718ZYHm4+rsJgrAK33agZcNNBpZF9C0lrw+96mL grOI8vsFAxJIWd190SopcDjzf7gIcwYvuySQwlpqmbeoibp8BWqP90Ym+jUVsotUhU/U rI9g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlSrbouqvpo4vF/GyTNXeIUr4xKaesCiFYaOhd19zXx8MtDV1ktxGTJ7nG6x8kvGCAhP8OZ
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.24.193 with SMTP id w1mr16570995obf.47.1405772988116; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 05:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.87.225 with HTTP; Sat, 19 Jul 2014 05:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1405740483446.13356@surrey.ac.uk>
References: <1405740483446.13356@surrey.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 08:29:48 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHxHggd-FDtBsnLEtFQ_PMmOMX-qfsu9r00bDUnqK4c=OZdPQw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] DTNWG proposal is a terribly bad idea
From: Vint Cerf <vint@google.com>
To: "l.wood@surrey.ac.uk" <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2ff9497910404fe8b0798"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/eu95V1OUTfEqh-2ndz-DW3yKhf0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 10:22:58 -0700
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IAB IAB <iab@iab.org>, dtn-interest <dtn-interest@irtf.org>, dtn@ietf.org, IETF-Discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 19 Jul 2014 12:29:51 -0000

ok, you don't need to participate in the WG if it is formed, Lloyd.

vint



On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:28 PM, <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk> wrote:

> I'm not going to be attending the DTNWG BOF remotely, as it's
> at 2am my local time - but I'd just like to point out, as I said in
>
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/current/msg00026.html
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/current/msg00054.html
>
> that I think that having an IETF workgroup push the technically
> flawed Bundle Protocol through on standards track, after years
> of poor development and unfixed problems across two IRTF research
> groups, is a really terribly bad idea that does not benefit the IETF
> community, and does not benefit work on delay-tolerant networking
> or ad-hoc networking in general.
>
> So, I am not in favour of the proposed DTNWG being formed.
>
> Enjoy Toronto.
>
> Lloyd Wood
> http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/dtn
> _______________________________________________
> dtn-interest mailing list
> dtn-interest@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email