Re: "We did not know" is not a good excuse

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Thu, 07 April 2016 17:29 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
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 36F3512D0BD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 10:29:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 g0zoD-Sb-AXq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 10:29:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D55612D531 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 10:29:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1557; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1460050193; x=1461259793; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=IPzBMgueXhodR3qUiGuaDtUQIHSl3HTDhWDVccK1tIE=; b=E6jzkWppIyrErLQSfCukmuci2x4++zQ/XXVEOJ+mTSBOoJfAAenUNl4U SSuJgtJ+oNKLZpp/vxW9IKatsFNk5tW+iNGMjP+LErzFJ32NRBz/MHZdC 6s3wUcKASJhJiUtYaZk9aF6DHxgrB93BoC/5ssAqv+2S5y6k+LrbESADS I=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 833
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C6AgDumAZX/5tdJa1cgzeBUAa6Uw6Bc?= =?us-ascii?q?4YNAoFFOBQBAQEBAQEBZRwLhEEBAQEDAXkFCwIBCBguMiUBAQQOBQ6IEQjBawE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQ0IiBaCVodqgisFmAQBgyOBZokCgVEBjTyPI?= =?us-ascii?q?wEeAUOCBBmBSmyHdX4BAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,449,1454976000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="257202277"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Apr 2016 17:29:49 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (xch-rcd-013.cisco.com [173.37.102.23]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u37HTneV016979 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 7 Apr 2016 17:29:49 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 12:29:48 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-013.cisco.com ([173.37.102.23]) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com ([173.37.102.23]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 12:29:48 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Subject: Re: "We did not know" is not a good excuse
Thread-Topic: "We did not know" is not a good excuse
Thread-Index: AdGQXOo2K6ee2QfjSBaO8Tfj5mxHYwAwEVyA
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 17:29:48 +0000
Message-ID: <3C0A584D-843E-4FE4-B09D-AD237E974E83@cisco.com>
References: <09ff01d1905c$f15d4e70$d417eb50$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <09ff01d1905c$f15d4e70$d417eb50$@olddog.co.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.35.191]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7E2C5CDB-B692-4630-BF89-A2153261B8EF"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/w5uUALppTlshnwNVAsmXOBBUlVY>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 17:29:58 -0000

> On Apr 6, 2016, at 8:34 PM, adrian@olddog.co.uk wrote:
> 
> How do we move on so:
> - this problem stops being a problem for IETF 100
> - this problem does not recur

That would be a very relevant conversation on mtgvenue@ietf.org.