IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Fri, 06 September 2019 22:08 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 158CA120DFD; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 YdNUvCi9__e9; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
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 85AF0120DFB; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 15:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.10.189] (30.51-175-112.customer.lyse.net [51.175.112.30]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 08F164E11B0A; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 22:08:17 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2019 00:08:14 +0200
Message-Id: <4246BC68-CD23-4D51-9E41-5812AAD5F3D4@employees.org>
References: <EDB1ACFD-3924-4599-B95D-D1FC6FF2425A@steffann.nl>
Cc: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>, "spring@ietf.org" <spring@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <EDB1ACFD-3924-4599-B95D-D1FC6FF2425A@steffann.nl>
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17A5821e)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/O2Vo9v6u_L4Pz8_gnCE7jZZIOFE>
Subject: Re: [spring] Spirit and Letter of the Law (was: Question about SRv6 Insert function)
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 Sep 2019 22:08:20 -0000

>> 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. 
> 
> I expect the chair to uphold a previously reached consensus and put the requirement of justifying deviating from it with the ones that want to go against said consensus.

Proposals are judged on their merits. 
There is no protocol police. 

These proposals are not moving as far as I can see. So what are you trying to achieve by getting your collective knickers in a twist now?

Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email