Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping)

otroan@employees.org Fri, 06 December 2019 19:42 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 415EE1200FE; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 11:42:08 -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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 9At4mVPlzRph; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 11:42:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C143712004A; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 11:42:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from astfgl.hanazo.no (unknown [IPv6:2a01:79c:cebd:47d8:c8b:f971:52ca:e1ba]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 720B74E11B75; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 19:42:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by astfgl.hanazo.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBC932529C73; Fri, 6 Dec 2019 20:42:03 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3601.0.10\))
From: otroan@employees.org
In-Reply-To: <22D9177B-033C-4657-96BA-FC6579918507@liquidtelecom.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 20:42:03 +0100
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, SPRING WG <spring@ietf.org>, 6man <6man@ietf.org>, "int-ads@ietf.org" <int-ads@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, rtg-ads <rtg-ads@tools.ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CCBD1E90-D36D-42A8-8097-1CD8AC02A8C2@employees.org>
References: <BN7PR05MB5699EA5F4C041538560282A6AE5F0@BN7PR05MB5699.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <52132FA9-669E-4B32-BDC8-6F06C98315F3@gmail.com> <CALx6S37r2JYbrMpN-qR3bD3kaOMj3xEceQC5JhVb8dqVzfq=5A@mail.gmail.com> <06B50938-0FC6-4901-9531-CC0385185F13@employees.org> <CALx6S35Y0LgwHzBawJUQEyYcRULgSVsRLCW0f35aqsrjX5QasA@mail.gmail.com> <1CEE1555-3D12-4998-9C69-23757649E908@employees.org> <22D9177B-033C-4657-96BA-FC6579918507@liquidtelecom.com>
To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3601.0.10)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/EvxABndGOhvEVv0RvXgBF4LRgjo>
Subject: Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping)
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2019 19:42:08 -0000

> While I may agree with you that is an attack on process here – and you may even find consensus on that statement – I am far from convinced you would find consensus on the question of which group is conducting the attack on process.

From https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/?qdr=m&so=frm

The last month's 10 top posters are:
Fernando: 25
Ole:      17 (including this message :-))
Bob:      12
Brian:    11
Ron:      10
Tom:       9
Gyan:      8
Sander:    8
Andrew:    7
Enno:      6

Ole