-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 3/25/13 9:35 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Monday, March 25, 2013 09:05 -0600 Peter Saint-Andre
<stpeter(_at_)stpeter(_dot_)im> wrote:
On 3/25/13 1:11 AM, Loa Andersson wrote:
AB,
I've been following this first with increasing amusement, ...
not!
A search on Baryun for IDs on the RFC Editors web page gives
the following result:
"o Based on your search of [Baryun] in the All Fields field
zero matches were made."
Time to terminate this "discussion"?
Actually the following search ...
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/search/?name=baryun&rfcs=on&a
ctiveDrafts=on&oldDrafts=on&search_submit=
... yields ...
draft-baryun-manet-technology-00 MANET Subnet Technologies
Considerations 2012-07-30 Expired
draft-baryun-manet-terminology-00 Terminology in Mobile Ad hoc
Networks 2012-07-04 Expired
draft-baryun-rfc2119-update-00 Key Words of Conditional Language
of Requirements Levels 2012-07-31 Expired
draft-baryun-roll-nap-00 The Node Ability of Participation (NAP)
2012-08-01 Expired
And, actually, this is more interesting. I don't follow MANET or
ROLL, but the 2119 update got some discussion on the IETF list. If
we think we have good ideas, most of us listen carefully to the
discussions and then generate -01 drafts that attempt to
incorporate the suggestions and deal with the objections. Here,
the documents are abandoned at -00. The author has moved on to
complaining about how badly the IETF and various of its WGs are
broken instead of trying to work with the community to refine the
ideas.
That has nothing to do with whether the particular contributions in
MANET should be acknowledged in any particular document. Had
either of the two I-Ds listed above that were addressed to that WG
gotten traction we might be having a discussion now about who he
would see fit to acknowledge. But, instead, we see expired -00
drafts and a lot of complaints.
Sad situation for all concerned.
Indeed. Thus my subtle suggestion that the original poster complete
some real technical work in the IETF community before making more
suggestions about process.
Peter
- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRUQCxAAoJEOoGpJErxa2pTF8P/1AsvEcbaF77HZPbgxaI/FgX
sBrFG+5TZSkFsF9Uc3iGleIyfux8WKxb0Gl0q/ooKXBQMl+iQ5AXddcuInZAnPl7
kADinPs0sKZ/2b1o5vEOEEcv0D9ZV4bAFg8kj+ErGQu8ATCLK7mDJYZwBhQ+2EnD
S8+J0kC5wKpGEVcqJPoWj1ag6y69451F0dE0XsGFtw/bN7lS4m4Q4ngblHj6f/fC
uHmPYHGiHU572mIoeD9vDpQ8sGqDDWgQmKSi8SCzrnQq9VoQMEiGYm/jtEElW4D/
1r0HY5QwcAI4rk6T1tjXkINZe0FaQtK4JZkeWIygY+ir559wl4drw3I095MB5ERc
AM6rGQkuf1vvkno0N0Q0eB1+sjCQon1LZTofM98n+NXc+GGH3dfUEpagjUGmDHcm
VpqlQ/RjQBoD3wkCQ5YRMK/mcGgjLoerqINf7mRVZrrr1pHAkqjV5msnbM/Ls5iD
CZJX8FDOXDHqwAfiRYZANKx+o8tqXFrrL+GA51SfR/imlF2X7hjW7hFMklurqhNV
lE6gHV5APK4537852YwsfDkBcjbH6jdJPWYFPbWramxMxdggusi8wOuioVa5dfc2
kney6JkUARcvlUUVtLcW4ricOYG9gF36zaSWG/zeEe6ZHlNOJQYmaAJ4oxk3xoMC
Tfy0MiUkkxJ7pHwOvLyT
=xUOr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----