Re: Apology

[Jan Zorz - Go6 <[e-mail]>]

On 26/02/2019 17:00, Fernando Gont wrote:
> On 26/2/19 12:35, Jan Zorz - Go6 wrote:
>> Dear @all,
>>
>> On 25/02/2019 09:37, Ole Troan wrote:> 6man is a long lived working
>> group, tasked with maintaining the IPv6
>>> specifications. That’s different from the typical IETF working group.
>>> Perhaps it is time to have a wider debate about how the working group
>>> should function and what it’s role should be.
>>
>> This is an important discussion to have. Can we define first what
>> exactly "maintaining the IPv6 specifications" mean?
> 
> Normally maintenance has to do with addressing problems/flaws found in
> the specs and/or operationally. -- which is essentially what we are
> doing here.
> 
> As a datapoint, e.g., tcpm, for one of the most widely-deployed
> protocols (almost 40 years old) there has been a fair share of work,
> ranging from generation and processing of sequence numbers and ack
> numbers (e.g. RFC6528 and RFC5961), definitions of new options,
> deprecation of features (e.g. URG indications), changing the initial
> window, changing RTO values, etc.
> 
> Not sure what the debate wuld be about with respect to what
> "maintenance" is about.

Well, my response was aimed at Ole's "Perhaps it is time to have a wider 
debate about how the working group should function and what it’s role 
should be."

Maybe the first thing to figure out is what version of meaning of 
"maintenance" we would like to use and that could set a nice path 
forward for a discussion that Ole proposed.

Cheers, Jan