IETF Logo Mail Archive

Support (as co-author)

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Mon, 25 November 2019 15:09 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65A71120959 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 07:09:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 nVRwH3CPbTtB for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 07:09:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A981A120137 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 07:09:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=530; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1574694593; x=1575904193; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding; bh=lTbnjPucaYIDG/4DnuHhRTPbzzQUCsUmk0K6zWhNs+o=; b=XmlvS/nY4rkc9iRguWxXxsIsg1gL30Di0UFRw2vEDCEjkkFHD0rr0OkQ soa6/UIblN2Azho+1dphcsWtHQxiV9WMWPl9W6YyPxLZOdn4IcwreKS1f kh8fTdCqG+1f7jO00LZXCXgz82RaM9NwHgTI/Zkk/GpeXsIgfUSmy0nuF g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0C+BACo7dtd/xbLJq1lHAEBAQEBBwEBEQEEBAEBgX4CgwpUASAShFWJA6FagWcJAQEBDAEBJwgBAYcUOQUNAgMNAQEEAQEBAgEFBG2FNwyFfBUvRwImAl8NCAEBgx4BgncPsB11gTKFT4M8gUIGgQ4oAYwvgUA/gTiGDgICGoEPg0iCXgSWYZdRgjWHHIdFhm0GG4IvjBGLXJcCiCiJLgIRFYFqIYFYMxoIGxWDKE8RFI9PhUBAA459AQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,241,1571702400"; d="scan'208";a="19606683"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 25 Nov 2019 15:09:51 +0000
Received: from [10.55.221.36] (ams-bclaise-nitro3.cisco.com [10.55.221.36]) (authenticated bits=0) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id xAPF9jA9016260 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:09:49 GMT
To: WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Subject: Support (as co-author)
Message-ID: <5871efb6-9fa7-a06a-e201-fb9fba04935e@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:09:44 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Authenticated-User: bclaise
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.55.221.36, ams-bclaise-nitro3.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/3JYRQ5JdBbiE-0qlndtEbu7PYuE>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:09:58 -0000

Dear all,

Along the years, I witnessed a trend, which intensifies with time: "I 
support the adoption of this draft (as a co-author)."
Well, if someone is a co-author, implicitly this person wants the draft 
to progress. Therefore, such as message carries no weight IMO.
Is it time for the WG chairs to start correcting this behaviour, or at 
least setting the right expectations?

ex: 
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/?q=Adoption%20Call%20for%20draft-ioamteam-ippm-ioam-direct-export

Regards, Benoit

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email