IETF Logo Mail Archive

[spring] Resignation request

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Mon, 02 March 2020 20:33 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 3648C3A1105; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 12:33:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 luCgQ2kZpk4g; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 12:33:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD1D03A1104; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 12:33:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3968749; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 21:32:57 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:date:date:message-id:subject:subject:mime-version :content-type:content-type:from:from:received:received; s=mail; t=1583181175; bh=163F7j21tNmrXzSkmhHMNizyFZtoqXqpkKrGVHZa/us=; b= Rax3afnA4SwSqlPPg0J3jw5UNNTqYJar8FL6KsHdGABjkhFWVAm2X15WKhGukbK1 6t9ra0NCMsHG0C1emmSymWZLImi7L2YA54SOSqk9L89GfOYtveszn7+09Qad8Q+h aGX+qh1EZzxrvekqDDgQjR5F4du1tT0OPCI39r0t23c=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 35C7NBtfcziY; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 21:32:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:2022:41af:c4f2:3aef] (unknown [IPv6:2a02:a213:a300:ce80:2022:41af:c4f2:3aef]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04D8C3C; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 21:32:54 +0100 (CET)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8559E073-D1E0-4B66-90DE-B5E3367F0340"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3594.4.19\))
Message-Id: <E85AEEC7-AAE7-4AE8-966E-FDF7AFD2B47C@steffann.nl>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 21:32:53 +0100
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
To: SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>, Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3594.4.19)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/PUpEAm34HTX-SVQR4sxVQBTiTq4>
Subject: [spring] Resignation request
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: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 20:33:32 -0000

Hi,

I am shocked by the declaration of consensus on draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming by Martin Vigoureux. There was much discussion going on about one aspect of the draft, and there was clearly no consensus amongst the participants. There are still questions that haven't been answered about even the applicability of the contested text, let alone addressed. Promised about for example reporting back on the impact on RIR policies have never been fulfilled. And those are just the two bits that concern me most personally.

Steamrolling a draft through a working group completely undermines the whole idea of the IETF and greatly damages it trustworthiness and reliability.  By bluntly declaring consensus despite all of the objections within two hours of the latest version of the draft being published I feel that Martin Vigoureux has lost the credibility as an AD. I strongly feel a resignation is in order at this point.

Cheers,
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email