Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity First.

Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com> Fri, 01 April 2011 14:17 UTC

Return-Path: <carlo@alinoe.com>
X-Original-To: vwrap@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vwrap@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB9F73A681A for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 07:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.506
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.506 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.093, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BA5mXhwVmpi5 for <vwrap@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 07:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fep13.mx.upcmail.net (fep13.mx.upcmail.net [62.179.121.33]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D523A67FA for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 07:17:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from edge03.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.238]) by viefep13-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.8.01.02.02 201-2260-120-106-20100312) with ESMTP id <20110401141931.VTPU1429.viefep13-int.chello.at@edge03.upcmail.net> for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Apr 2011 16:19:31 +0200
Received: from mail9.alinoe.com ([77.250.43.12]) by edge03.upcmail.net with edge id SEKV1g01u0FlQed03EKW1m; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:19:31 +0200
X-SourceIP: 77.250.43.12
Received: from carlo by mail9.alinoe.com with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <carlo@alinoe.com>) id 1Q5fCD-0005RX-GN for vwrap@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Apr 2011 16:19:29 +0200
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 16:19:29 +0200
From: Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>
To: vwrap@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20110401161929.1e3763f8@hikaru.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <1301499645.12359.10.camel@mdickson-hplinux>
References: <20110330011458.GB8908@alinoe.com> <4D931434.2030206@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <4646639E08F58B42836FAC24C94624DD92FDE22F3F@GVW0433EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net> <AANLkTimaA3qcKOUUjQzvq86R1UMvamTc4yJh4NBMp_Gq@mail.gmail.com> <1301499645.12359.10.camel@mdickson-hplinux>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=HQ3F56nxkum+cgCiDL7AXQpbvw7DWrWCBJRnYYnM0Zc= c=1 sm=0 a=SNAFxGGoWQUA:10 a=lF6S9qf5Q1oA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=cH6R9-kdAAAA:8 a=BjFOTwK7AAAA:8 a=e11pYT2ks33SI-3qgYYA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=bt0zGP92IBIA:10 a=bW3kdApBr58A:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117
Subject: Re: [vwrap] Statements of Consensus. Flexibity First.
X-BeenThere: vwrap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual World Region Agent Protocol - IETF working group <vwrap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap>
List-Post: <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 14:17:52 -0000

On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:40:45 -0400
Mike Dickson <mike.dickson@hp.com> wrote: 
> Yes, I get that. I have lots of standards experience, even serving on
> the board of one organization in the past.  I honestly find the whole
> us vs. them rhetoric tiring.  A healthy community will include both
> individual and corporate interests.  And its to be expected that
> they'll all argue from their respective POV.  That's healthy.
> 
> Mike

Then please explain to me again why you want
to make it impossible for some party to use
VWRAP for their specific use case, and apparently,
are only interested to create a protocol that
supports your use case (and those things that
you are not going to oppose to when they are
proposed, for the sake of creating a standard
at all).

What is the problem to make it possible to use
VWRAP by an as wide as possible group of people?

-- 
Carlo Wood <carlo@alinoe.com>