So you have a bunch of people who have actively read and participated in the process – in order to ensure that was emerges from the IETF are documents that are satisfactory and do not violate other drafts and impose things on operators that some operators find unacceptable?
I would believe that these people should be applauded for their participation – they actually read the drafts and took the time to do the reviews. I’m proud my name is on this list Andrew From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, 6 December 2019 at 22:42 To: Andrew Alston <[email protected]> Cc: Tom Herbert <[email protected]>, Ron Bonica <[email protected]>, SPRING WG <[email protected]>, 6man <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Bob Hinden <[email protected]>, rtg-ads <[email protected]>, Fernando Gont <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [spring] We don't seem to be following our processes (Re: Network Programming - Penultimate Segment Popping) > While I may agree with you that is an attack on process here – and you may > even find consensus on that statement – I am far from convinced you would > find consensus on the question of which group is conducting the attack on > process. From https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/?qdr=m&so=frm<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/?qdr=m&so=frm> The last month's 10 top posters are: Fernando: 25 Ole: 17 (including this message :-)) Bob: 12 Brian: 11 Ron: 10 Tom: 9 Gyan: 8 Sander: 8 Andrew: 7 Enno: 6 Ole
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
