Re: [Teas] FW: The word "transport"

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sat, 02 May 2020 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99B053A09AD for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 May 2020 13:10:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.357
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.357 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAY_BE_FORGED=1.54, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no 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 6MLCfcG-DsCl for <teas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 May 2020 13:10:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta5.iomartmail.com (mta5.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.155]) (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 808BD3A09AB for <teas@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 May 2020 13:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (vs1.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.121]) by mta5.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 042KA7Qi028643; Sat, 2 May 2020 21:10:07 +0100
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C440B2203B; Sat, 2 May 2020 21:10:06 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.248]) by vs1.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF1D62203A; Sat, 2 May 2020 21:10:06 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (81-174-202-163.bbplus.pte-ag2.dyn.plus.net [81.174.202.163] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 042KA5g2021178 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 2 May 2020 21:10:06 +0100
Reply-To: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Eric Gray'" <eric.gray@ericsson.com>, <teas@ietf.org>
References: <036501d61f26$01756f20$04604d60$@olddog.co.uk> <DM5PR05MB33881A76688021C9B05EA556C7AA0@DM5PR05MB3388.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <03ef01d61f9a$2f5850f0$8e08f2d0$@olddog.co.uk> <A02167A2-4AA6-4522-A6E8-8D9157BEB3F4@nokia.com> <044101d61fc5$1656bd50$430437f0$@olddog.co.uk> <C974BCBC-BDD7-4A01-AED7-30926BC72987@nokia.com> <MN2PR15MB3103FCC7BCA3C126C1F11C8797AB0@MN2PR15MB3103.namprd15.prod.outlook.com> <0A0B7870-40F7-43B2-964B-E0A408D0B844@nokia.com> <DM5PR05MB33883A5B6547F2297BDF6EFDC7AB0@DM5PR05MB3388.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <1120E99B-CF3C-4FEE-9EBB-CE807CCC62F1@nokia.com> <DM5PR05MB3388B66471C5AB0E877F5C14C7AB0@DM5PR05MB3388.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <MN2PR15MB3103F3FCDA52F17AFD95DD1D97AB0@MN2PR15MB3103.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR15MB3103F3FCDA52F17AFD95DD1D97AB0@MN2PR15MB3103.namprd15.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 21:10:04 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <05ea01d620bd$abc21760$03464620$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_05EB_01D620C6.0D8769C0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQIMCNRaZu8YlTaDCQfeAjf3ZILbpAFlZRhPAfoMhc0CDDG86QGGDXihAkWx32gBoZaScwIMuVP9Ag7z+e8BvKH6ZQJh/TYIAjxRlt2nfuwi8A==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 81.174.202.163
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-25392.002
X-TM-AS-Result: No--14.050-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--14.050-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-25392.002
X-TMASE-Result: 10--14.050000-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: gzVbiXtWD9vxIbpQ8BhdbPHkpkyUphL9j87/LK+2sqPiRCPcinj8Usc/ +8UeRzDJzN1QNdlHb7lOK7bmt5lclklNkNzbYQ+3rMcMK3Nm8dlB9uUinegF0Vc/CedjlcvkwXL S0LkPCajdkk0+INu19Fr4ihd5vKMdWQ/uteeVE8DBjbyj5wYDmhohPd1vQnlrUZ4LnxBONFXv/7 2zC4hJFUtt4xcKCO29ftblt3CCdbwVlVZBrluia980oP25F8xpcQ43DruBJVxKddiF2Wo8edk2l 7i3oc4zRw3fpQHgw3uX6ygEq2dUrd/xBY6jZqnZJhFEQZiq2ZRKRaXN2yYjHk/cRvj5stP6fUKi 99DpPHhwOjip7ny6DD6npql+2To6pBUgYSl1eZVu2K0KSdxtGYrpD7h4O62+1fKO4SX8ER1R18Q pzXStTvkHxcbJXlk3NQO42YVKKvBTovWuZWqWkSMVbwsllejL1ViV5EWK7TubKItl61J/yZUdXE /WGn0FSlnU38LCY8vQqQhSw0x2VGrz/G/ZSbVqtVX2a1/ZsVjzHwKXSGNRpCa9st2QQHPtpgciL 3a9sEkBIpCcI6L8JD0olLIqLB4sfYlF4ISzuStkTS6+0UDE1ZdSikT3l+9nO8xRFn8f/ro=
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/GFvf06bjxvkeOOSWV5x8cP1v26I>
Subject: Re: [Teas] FW: The word "transport"
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 May 2020 20:10:15 -0000

Eric,

 

> Quite frankly, I find it surprising that we are debating the

> terminology choices that were made by a design team at

> the working group level.  It is one thing if it can be argued

> that the choices are counter-intuitive – though I can think

> of numerous cases where that has not carried much weight.

 

Sorry. Did you hope that the WG would say, “Thanks DT, here is your rubber stamp”?

 

Or maybe you are saying that the DT hasn’t completed its work and the discussion in the WG is premature.

 

But I thought that the docs had been brought to the WG for discussion. Pardon me if I got that wrong.

 

Adrian