IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping)

otroan@employees.org Sat, 07 December 2019 11:39 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D69BD1201E0 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 03:39:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 qg2xxX2wyBpx for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 03:39:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:3::74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 946221200F1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 03:39:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (unknown [IPv6:2a01:79c:cebd:47d8:c8b:f971:52ca:e1ba]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EFC274E11B04; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 11:39:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 448A5253A180; Sat, 7 Dec 2019 12:39:43 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3601.0.10\))
Subject: Re: We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping)
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <23751bbf-a1cb-9480-3415-ec7ddd67d37f@si6networks.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 12:39:43 +0100
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2D4B43CC-EE52-4CD7-B8FE-E79B90EDEE7A@employees.org>
References: <CALx6S3588ja9AZzBQ0dqwx0j-ki6A5tusye+odQKPyAyF+hEww@mail.gmail.com> <10E890EA-3278-44EE-881E-EBC91D419587@employees.org> <23751bbf-a1cb-9480-3415-ec7ddd67d37f@si6networks.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3601.0.10)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/0sVSB0JCdczX6_-wDGY6KUdgmm4>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2019 11:39:49 -0000

Fernando,

> Is it really a serious way to try to achieve consensus to routinely fail
> to answer the questions that wg participants ask .. which one might
> argue that should have already been in version -00 of the document?

If it is not something I would consider productive use of the working groups
time, nor mine, I refrain to answer questions that have both been asked
and answered before. I am not aware of any unanswered questions.

I have made my views on your mailing list behaviour quite clear.
I do not think it is productive use of working group time that
_I_ continue to engage in conversation with you.

If you have any unresolved process issues, take it up with my co-chair or our ADs.

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email