ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Last call debate on draft-farrell-perpass-attack

2014-01-07 22:32:50
In any case, as Adrian points out, this document provides no tools for a 
misbehaving person to use as an argument.

which clearly says 'not BCP, this is informational' to me.

Lloyd Wood
http://about.me/lloydwood
________________________________________
From: ietf [ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Jari Arkko 
[jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net]
Sent: 07 January 2014 18:44
To: adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Last call debate on draft-farrell-perpass-attack

Thanks, Adrian - this matches pretty closely my own thoughts as well, but you 
put it in very clear words.

And to be honest - we do see over-eager ADs at times (as we sometimes also see 
over-eager authors, chairs, or working groups…) and I've been over-eager myself 
at times. Hopefully less often nowadays with more perspective. We all make 
mistakes. But I've yet to witness a situation where reasonable discussion could 
not resolve the situation, not to mention the availability of appeals, nomcom 
comments, recalls, etc. In any case, as Adrian points out, this document 
provides no tools for a misbehaving person to use as an argument.

Jari


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>