Re: [spring] Spirit and Letter of the Law (was: Question about SRv6 Insert function)

[Ole Troan <[e-mail]>]

> 
> 
> 
>> I think you have repeatedly made your point.
> 
> Yes he has, and he makes a good point that should be heard. Your argument of "RFCs aren't the law, and we can ignore parts of them if it suits us" just isn't true. RFCs are based on consensus, and ignoring the outcome of that consensus when it suits you is unacceptable for a WG chair.

Then I don’t think I have expressed myself in a way that has been understood by you. 

But he isn’t making a point that hasn’t been made many times before. I asked him to argue his point in the context of the actual drafts in question, which I believe he did not. The protocol police rhetoric used in the wider community doesn’t appear to me to add value, rather create disruption. 
 
I don’t see a need to continue this debate on meta issues, but since you framed this as criticism of me in the chair role I found it required to reply. 

Ole