IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] dispute (Re: Results of consensus call on ECT(1) usage)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Fri, 22 May 2020 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9734B3A09AC for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 May 2020 07:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
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=eggert.org
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 t1bu3pW_pm3c for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 May 2020 07:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 514F03A0963 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 May 2020 07:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:0:35:24f5:b2e7:5639:7122] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:0:35:24f5:b2e7:5639:7122]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EB241611520; Fri, 22 May 2020 17:25:21 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1590157522; bh=Ws0InkMLGk2xImDVBka/42Mw+k8WVPvfMMTfTpkT4Z8=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=uChoNi7s02e9TebTS13+qCTOAtN2YbsU1MavlkGQIJKdhYvtamgB824GoNExg8ITV WHxYiir+iwP5Wt7TYz9+gJN7PwlncBKn361FKHB3zRXQTrNfTd0Es42hc9duNFKZTn RrXBgiBmmCuO51xJPOMRtNm9V6Y24f0Aj0VmgS3c=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <30C37177-5C1F-440C-969A-A7AA33E1744D@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D1BD9AA5-CF51-4FED-98F9-48A4E005A585"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 17:25:21 +0300
In-Reply-To: <202005221335.04MDZEg5022015@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
Cc: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
References: <202005221335.04MDZEg5022015@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
X-MailScanner-ID: EB241611520.AFC0A
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/Uo9y3Ntzi7nXIEsozvLxVUVzqlY>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] dispute (Re: Results of consensus call on ECT(1) usage)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 14:25:31 -0000

Hi,

On 2020-5-22, at 16:35, Rodney W. Grimes <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
>> We were never given a ?none of the above? choice.
> 
> Which was actually itemized by the IETF Chair Alisha Cooper at the
> very end of the Interim Meeting, I was rather shocked to not see
> it as an option, and hench my vote was made with a comment that
> I had been "boxed into a choice."

you can always refrain from responding to the poll?

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email