> We're doing it. That's an "uh-oh" comment. It's very common to hear people say that the IETF doesn't know how to say "no" to new work. I think the real problem is that many people bringing new work to the IETF don't know how to accept being told "no" and it leads to harass-a-thons of the IESG on the one hand and dubious work on the other. I think part of committing to working in collaborative organizations like the IETF is arguing your case the best you can but agreeing to accept community consensus even if it doesn't come out the way you'd like. > Primarily, folks want to use it as in > "Ethernet-over-MPLS". That may not necessarily go down > well with you either, but think of MPLS as a logical FR. I think we need to retain a focus on connectionless, packet-oriented delivery and how to build on that. I wonder if we aren't going considerably astray with the growing emphasis on pseudo-circuits. Melinda