Re: Consensus? RFC1628 to Historic -Reply
Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald.Alvestrand@maxware.no> Mon, 03 August 1998 20:11 UTC
Delivery-Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 16:11:40 -0400
Return-Path: owner-ups-mib@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from cnri.reston.va.us (ns [132.151.1.1]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id QAA26328 for <ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 16:11:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU (CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.1]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id QAA05788 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 16:11:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA22200; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 16:04:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from dokka.maxware.no (dokka.maxware.no [195.139.236.69]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA22192; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 16:04:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from alden (alvestrand.kvatro.no [193.216.167.143]) by dokka.maxware.no (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA20773; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 21:59:44 +0200
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980803202435.01dbfe10@dokka.maxware.no>
X-Sender: hta@dokka.maxware.no
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 1998 20:24:35 +0200
To: Ron Pitt <rpitt@email.exide.com>, astolinski@worldnet.att.net, maria@xedia.com
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald.Alvestrand@maxware.no>
Subject: Re: Consensus? RFC1628 to Historic -Reply
Cc: ups-mib@CS.UTK.EDU
In-Reply-To: <s5c59661.062@email.exide.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 10:56 03.08.98 -0400, Ron Pitt wrote: >>>> "C. Adam Stolinski" <astolinski@worldnet.att.net> 07/30/98 08:58am >> There is a difference between "work" and "makework". >> >> "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." >> >> Regards, >> Adam > >I'll second that. > The essence of why the IETF standards track is a multistage process: If there is nobody willing to document whether it is broken or not, the IETF doesn't want to take the responsibility for claiming that it is not broken. We seem to have consensus that nobody's willing to take the time to document that it's not broken. That's a reasonable solution. Harald A -- Harald Tveit Alvestrand, Maxware, Norway Harald.Alvestrand@maxware.no
- Re: Consensus? RFC1628 to Historic -Reply Ron Pitt
- Re: Consensus? RFC1628 to Historic -Reply Harald Tveit Alvestrand