From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:joel(_at_)stevecrocker(_dot_)com]
At 09:28 PM 9/14/2006, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:joel(_at_)stevecrocker(_dot_)com]
I raised several specific objections to your view, which you
have chosen not to respond to here. The comment you quote
was not intended as an argument you should (or as you observe
could) respond to, but rather as an indication taht I would
not be surprised if there were additional issues beyond the
ones I raised that would also need to be discussed.
If you make arguments that are lazy and demonstrate disrespect as yours did
then don't be surprised if people respond to the arguments that you are (or at
least should be) ashamed of.
Your other argument was that there should be no change because there was no
consensus, an entirely circular argument that implies nobody can ever argue for
change.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf