IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [re-ECN] Conex charter - now in External Review

ken carlberg <carlberg@g11.org.uk> Wed, 28 April 2010 13:35 UTC

Return-Path: <carlberg@g11.org.uk>
X-Original-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: re-ecn@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 180CC3A6C07 for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 06:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.045
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.045 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.046, BAYES_50=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MF2u615SEFSd for <re-ecn@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 06:35:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from portland.eukhost.com (portland.eukhost.com [92.48.97.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE7A3A6C2E for <re-ecn@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 06:32:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c-76-111-69-4.hsd1.va.comcast.net ([76.111.69.4]:62311 helo=[192.168.0.20]) by portland.eukhost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <carlberg@g11.org.uk>) id 1O77Mx-0001io-5H; Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:32:03 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: ken carlberg <carlberg@g11.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <EE00404438E9444D90AEA84210DC406793D9DB@pacdcexcmb05.cable.comcast.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 09:32:02 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A8B8C5AF-37C2-4DD6-BDDB-760FC616BE8F@g11.org.uk>
References: <20100401165723.GA1375@verdi><4A916DBC72536E419A0BD955EDECEDEC06363F60@E03MVB1-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net><20100406192914.GG11835@verdi> <4BBBF64C.2020101@thinkingcat.com><6036E869-9710-4F7B-BB30-5A70C7250D36@nokia.com><20100413184853.GA76668@verdi> <4BD6F2DD.3040202@cisco.com> <20100427151601.GF16203@verdi> <EE00404438E9444D90AEA84210DC406793D9DB@pacdcexcmb05.cable.comcast.com>
To: "Woundy, Richard" <Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - portland.eukhost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - g11.org.uk
Cc: re-ecn@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [re-ECN] Conex charter - now in External Review
X-BeenThere: re-ecn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: re-inserted explicit congestion notification <re-ecn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/re-ecn>
List-Post: <mailto:re-ecn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/re-ecn>, <mailto:re-ecn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 13:35:03 -0000

On Apr 27, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Woundy, Richard wrote:

> (Let's NOT discuss these questions on the list!!!)
> 
> Is there a list of vendors that have stated that they plan to implement
> CONEX technology in their products? Is there a list of vendors that have
> stated that they have no plans to implement CONEX technology in their
> products?

I quite agree about not discussing the above questions, or even considering them in any formal manner on this list or IESG discussions.  I sympathize with the curiosity that stems from those questions, but they are quite out of scope of the IETF in chartering WGs.  But if others feel differently, I would like to see how this same litmus test has been conducted in the past for *all* other BoFs, working groups, and even drafts.  Point being -- that's a very nasty rathole to fall into.

cheers,

-ken

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email