> snmp, netconf, yang, ... heck even cops played in the space > > when your so-bgp, 15 years in the non-making, is mature as a document set, > with two or more implementations, i'll support it for standards track, no > problem. i am not desperate enough to sabatoge the work of others to > move my work forward.
Wow -- care to prove that accusation? Or have we gotten to the point in the IETF where personal accusations are a normal, everyday, substitute for actual discussion? This sort of personal abuse is what turns people away from the IETF, and reduces our value as a community. This is just wrong, Randy, and you know it is. My point is simple -- the "no-one will use it" argument washes either way, so there needs to be some other grounds for deciding -- it's not a useful argument in either direction, honestly. Which throws us back to what "standards track" actually means. On that score, I'm not certain what the terms mean, so I asked for clarification on what the wording actually means. :-) Russ _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
