Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Sun, 01 March 2020 02:03 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando@gont.com.ar>
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 E81AF3A17B7 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 18:03:52 -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, 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 t4J91TPPOZIS for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 18:03:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fgont.go6lab.si (fgont.go6lab.si [91.239.96.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 836203A17B4 for <spring@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Feb 2020 18:03:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [181.45.84.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by fgont.go6lab.si (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2A0C83224; Sun, 1 Mar 2020 02:54:23 +0100 (CET)
To: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: spring@ietf.org
References: =?utf-8?q?=3C17421=5F1575566127=5F5DE93B2F=5F17421=5F93=5F1=5F53?= =?utf-8?q?C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48D1A3DA=40OPEXCAUBM43=2Ecorporate?= =?utf-8?q?=2Eadroot=2Einfra=2Eftgroup=3E_=3C5518=5F1582908787=5F5E594573=5F?= =?utf-8?q?5518=5F436=5F1=5F53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48DD1BCA=40OPEXC?= =?utf-8?q?AUBM43=2Ecorporate=2Eadroot=2Einfra=2Eftgroup=3E?= <C8417F71-D61E-42AC-831E-B85269D5D4A5@steffann.nl> <9b677b7c-fe52-dbae-7f83-2b5be5194325@gont.com.ar> <6.2.5.6.2.20200228132634.1060a610@elandnews.com> <9449c98e-b1d6-2c74-b78d-df3f5ba15ebc@nokia.com>
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Message-ID: <747f5271-8665-bf48-caa3-2b5dd1b2a43f@gont.com.ar>
Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 22:54:00 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9449c98e-b1d6-2c74-b78d-df3f5ba15ebc@nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/TkK7r8-E292akAbz1s4h2cTsEmE>
Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
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: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 02:03:53 -0000

On 29/2/20 17:03, Martin Vigoureux wrote:
> Dear Mr Moonesamy,
> 
> I am convinced there is no conflict of interest.

"conflict of interest" 
(https://www.lexico.com/definition/conflict_of_interest)
noun

a situation in which the concerns or aims of two different parties are 
incompatible.

a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal 
benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity.


There is, indeed, a conflict of interest when the same person that has 
to judge consensus on a document is an author/contributor of that document.

Note: flagging a "conflict of interest" is not an accusation of actually 
behaving dishotestly in the presence of such conflict of interest.



> Regarding the errata, "not processed" would have been more accurate than 
> "not accepted" but I am sure this is what Bruno meant.

The concerns of this document violating RFC8200 were dismissed by 
stating that the AD had not accepted the erratum I had submitted.

Clearly, if Bruno had meant "not processed", he couldn't have dismissed 
the erratum like that.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1