Re: [Pppext] Future of the PPP WG

William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com> Sun, 02 October 2011 11:11 UTC

Return-Path: <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pppext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3556A21F8E4F for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Oct 2011 04:11:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.485
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.485 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.114, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7+p5MaCu7YQT for <pppext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Oct 2011 04:11:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52AF21F8DB2 for <pppext@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Oct 2011 04:11:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iaby26 with SMTP id y26so4837848iab.31 for <pppext@ietf.org>; Sun, 02 Oct 2011 04:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nhMIjvmdYE6dIq/3bpiCzPpnsg+8PNhO8qBAMERXb9E=; b=WO2m22qt1ficMhHPrubhnSTNGUrw7VjNow+y5gUBvE4dvVpqTX1rOkk+sYHKfXPazb 1+V0xKzjVtftplKwDkf6TlgCcb6DE2st/y3rIZ+qwj8qoTLVLqTya3kuc6g08f1D1dQD FHmBG3piQ6dsM3dqq0rJAnpzQ9yN9ssWwsiAU=
Received: by 10.231.82.131 with SMTP id b3mr20674285ibl.74.1317554069664; Sun, 02 Oct 2011 04:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Wastrel-3.local (c-68-40-194-239.hsd1.mi.comcast.net. [68.40.194.239]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bk20sm21471660ibb.2.2011.10.02.04.14.27 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 02 Oct 2011 04:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E884792.5050200@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 07:14:26 -0400
From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110920 Thunderbird/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Glen Zorn <glenzorn@gmail.com>
References: <CAF4+nEF-G1zpRABffyT+fpx=Oc0__u1Yth6oK-1UWLTqEgCRVg@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEFNPkZsnkDw_T0ehjTAdHTK4OMJ6kf8H39xYGRHSxaPkA@mail.gmail.com> <4E82A074.4030406@gmail.com> <4E8453FD.10407@gmail.com> <4E88086A.6090301@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E88086A.6090301@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: pppext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pppext] Future of the PPP WG
X-BeenThere: pppext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PPP Extensions <pppext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pppext>
List-Post: <mailto:pppext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext>, <mailto:pppext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 11:11:32 -0000

On 10/2/11 2:44 AM, Glen Zorn wrote:
> On 9/29/2011 6:18 PM, William Allen Simpson wrote:
>> On 9/28/11 12:20 AM, Glen Zorn wrote:
>>> Actually, there is one useful thing that this WG could do before its
>>> demise: update or obsolete RFC 3818 so that necessary work can be done
>>> when it (the WG) is gone.
>>>
>> Glen, what needs to be changed?  I didn't pay any particular attention
>> to it at the time,
>
> You're not alone, Bill: not much attention was called to it (at least in
> pppext).  It was an individual submission (kind of ironic, considering
> that the evil it purports to fix is the lack of WG review).  IIRC, I was
> unaware of its existence until the announcement of its publication.
>
It _was_ an odd thing for an individual submission, but I wasn't too
worried about it, as it was proposed in a draft sent to the list.

I went back and looked at my list archives, and found that I'd not even
ever read half the messages about it.  It came out of a series of posts on
the Subject: Re: Reigning in "bad" extensions to PPP.

At the time, I did read the first few messages with each new Subject line:
    proposed draft IANA Considerations
    I-D ACTION:draft-schryver-pppext-iana-00.txt
    IANA PPP considerations
    IANA Considerations for PPP to Proposed Standard

Again, what needs to be changed?


>> but this really looks like a one-off RFC to update
>> some kind of IANA considerations.  It doesn't appear to be idiotic.
>
> Not idiotic at all; the author is not an idiot.  Diabolical, maybe, but
> not idiotic.
>
I've an informal personal rule going back to the early '90s against
responding to Schryver's usual provocative rants, and had kill filed him
for some years.  I'd say more of a troll than diabolical.