[nvo3] Issue discussion in NVO3 (was Re: NVO3 WG Adoption of draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe-04)

Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net> Fri, 01 May 2015 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <bensons@queuefull.net>
X-Original-To: nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 067A81A897E for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 May 2015 10:22:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 YOIPHVFU0Fcw for <nvo3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 May 2015 10:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f169.google.com (mail-qc0-f169.google.com [209.85.216.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61EDD1A8898 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 May 2015 10:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qcrf4 with SMTP id f4so46152710qcr.0 for <nvo3@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 May 2015 10:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=bEUbLlL3GeNL8pOebAPA4wowfCs6gsFJ03q39ZpK6EA=; b=XAEsdPWamP+rnh2rMxB+LPv0GYFurh860Uga2xX8Uoew5LCpsu5FhBauQpnfrT2pzh ivSgSvgqVQ4Dea2Yg2yv7g8CZQekJczI5ZGCMvele3hG8zjLbpTGo6WggjQ3lPGxB9XS nB4A6B0vbPrHWpZ/pXDqYJ435AvZaEKMp6PgcYDdh0jToTG21KVFFgCDFmmo0rGvmsns wiM+16J8lEoUITUhJyWsiBbFqoTxnIGKkZH1fYyf6sirtlhmXor/UPcx1zXT+/1l6pr2 vSB6ZC3O9+UwFl4j52ZWjzuvt+KAAmc6x7eggNwE2Ie7vv1E6G2iD1p1AIdL9sZICZ7I jGUg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkp+ECpTJGmCyGqHwTWn8XoNA9iXa6pv9N5BcQ6EUS6PultVeorDjxSUXD1wnveZjUJ3fJW
X-Received: by 10.55.31.218 with SMTP id n87mr20453071qkh.99.1430500948412; Fri, 01 May 2015 10:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from desolation-2.local (68-115-154-254.static.hckr.nc.charter.com. [68.115.154.254]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j81sm3756349qge.33.2015.05.01.10.22.27 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 01 May 2015 10:22:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5543B651.6090802@queuefull.net>
Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 13:22:25 -0400
From: Benson Schliesser <bensons@queuefull.net>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.11 (Macintosh/20140602)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sarikaya@ieee.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nvo3/hIkOemZts6KljuPpthT4XQKk9FI>
Cc: "nvo3@ietf.org" <nvo3@ietf.org>
Subject: [nvo3] Issue discussion in NVO3 (was Re: NVO3 WG Adoption of draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe-04)
X-BeenThere: nvo3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Network Virtualization Overlays \(NVO3\) Working Group" <nvo3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nvo3>, <mailto:nvo3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nvo3/>
List-Post: <mailto:nvo3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nvo3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3>, <mailto:nvo3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 17:22:31 -0000

Hi, Behcet -

Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> Let me say this, sorry Benson, no offense to you but in this list I
> hardly see chair reviews, unlike most other WGs.

Just to be clear: I'm not offended. Nor do I intend to offend anybody 
else. Meaningful and constructive discussion of ideas is always welcome.

I'll take into consideration your comment about providing chairs' 
reviews. Typically when I call for Adoption my message will indicate 
that we believe consensus exists. And prior to submission to the IESG 
both Matthew and I perform careful reviews with the authors, both for 
editorial purposes as well as to ensure that the draft accurately 
captures consensus. In between those events, I tend to allow the WG to 
develop its own consensus rather than influence it. But I will 
reconsider whether or not the WG would also benefit from more of my 
technical thoughts during development. Thank you for this feedback.

> I noticed that the issue tracker has never been used in nvo3.
> Once this draft is submitted as WG draft, I am going to be happy to
> provide my technical comments on the issue tracker maybe lead the way.

I don't have a strong opinion about whether the Issue Tracker is helpful 
or not. I suspect that it will not add any benefit to NVO3 at this time, 
but I'm willing to reconsider that view.

That being said, whether issues are described in the Tracker or on the 
mailing list my expectation is that the issue will be meaningful and 
clearly described. Merely claiming that there is an issue is not 
adequate by itself. Also, an individual's failure to understand 
something does not necessarily qualify as an issue.

I would encourage all participants to consider whether or not their 
feedback is a material issue, that can be clearly described, which would 
result in constructive discussion. If not, then that feedback may not 
need to consume WG attention. This is true regardless of whether the 
issue is posted in Tracker, on the list, etc.

-Benson