IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 21 December 2017 14:22 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F9B9126CC7 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 06:22:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 vgEwRSFCrsNV for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 06:22:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x229.google.com (mail-qt0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::229]) (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 3203C120724 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 06:22:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x229.google.com with SMTP id g10so32537425qtj.12 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 06:22:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=Nf6f5krKztPmPTOy2rvRf/wLf0vsd7K6HLMJ6XBL2Xw=; b=kjIQq2DnjirtjrEonHUuxXxwN7UQrNg4TneM26FC7mAivYlO17VpolqcShuyZzlfpb Yt3nLmFaAyg1LTni6PEhYGIHbNZVSDgd7ZJEOJzewyb85lsUKhM9xMikY2WazOW3sj6U 5nTmyejNu8p5XvxE1/wPlX7ZcLRh8FB/ECTlBf5PqtW8xdHdFcKlblEaP5v+gQ1fzSsO J0bTa7+2PMYi8B2IWAibxwWUIows8w8GaJ7a9okYItAFOc0T91BX8hNGngzDu7HgpjnA UBoHDJx9eIxSgwJH16Vf/4lBFZ9wStLgiwJw+BbOr/m/bdX3fpXOTxq9CwlWPtpvsGeB /IRw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=Nf6f5krKztPmPTOy2rvRf/wLf0vsd7K6HLMJ6XBL2Xw=; b=HNs0Qjs1lCh6ojaLYRBVfioYto01Dn/kV/LlxSGCet+o+0Ro1wSXrw7o6LYwLvsZoD 5uuEmimuNATfEuXjaGKLDtfir7uIgEm8cfqJWTx+r63IItK+ow6AAfHdg6DO/WMwWPEK NYIr61wuAxdSQ5arXRt45s1NZI/lMAcZoeSOssGtwIVBV+TPOtiwoi1O9Xjbpqwjgyrg H0EI5N6e4HYxcazoRTWUn4cGF05RrJiey8EhQW3W2x2pCtrqY+td1+Sc3h4rZt2RgbcX 3RtHSgA0cH1XOymeD9+j28cFycSfQba5O69cuXdHTc8ixST3D67tj1G80qyZkve3qNho R0Pg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mI4EaRrAAjPjy80IAAuBiFQQZHAvflybe3EgCEr9QAhjPnoPPFM PWzUsiRrigQA6hxe4tcp8RBiTdQ0yUw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBouo4sEJVPiwMsrTMxV/QTjKKKTkH/Us357kArlcjfHhZDItO3700Jaqmjw7KkCxs5VUZwqHog==
X-Received: by 10.200.15.248 with SMTP id f53mr15523626qtk.127.1513866169309; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 06:22:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.30.153] (c-24-60-163-103.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [24.60.163.103]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m22sm12737335qtf.85.2017.12.21.06.22.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 Dec 2017 06:22:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <90B5A9AC-9E35-4F02-8A16-B4111E738760@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_832E9EDD-7275-4605-967A-B026384FF146"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 09:22:46 -0500
In-Reply-To: <AM5P190MB0434A92C65FE8657EB533315AE0D0@AM5P190MB0434.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, rtgwg <rtgwg@ietf.org>
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@outlook.com>
References: <AM4PR0401MB2241817BD0EEEE79B32C8CD2BD0F0@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <51b495e6-ee1d-4224-6c7c-dec0f8248cc9@cisco.com> <D6601576.27F3B%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233AA98562@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <AM4PR0401MB22414952845433B8D59CCC90BD0C0@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233AA98825@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <60324BD8-E91D-49C7-9AE6-C6E22C836AC8@fugue.com> <AM5P190MB0434A92C65FE8657EB533315AE0D0@AM5P190MB0434.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/YsJDIgxRwK3mUV31Eeg-OCvwkPg>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 14:22:53 -0000

On Dec 21, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@outlook.com> wrote:
> As I said before, I don't mind to join a discussion if the topic is interesting and its information is clear, but I was tired of asking for technical discussion so it will take the drafts forward.

You haven't quite heard what I've said.   What I've said is that you need to start joining in discussions where what is being discussed isn't your draft.   You need to approach those discussions with an attitude of finding some way to be helpful, not as a way of promoting your interests.   If you come to the IETF to promote your interests, you're not going to be very effective.   You are not being singled out here—people come to the IETF all the time with self-interested motivations; sometimes they manage to get something they wanted out of the process, but it's always a struggle.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email