Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Ohta-san, your email (retained as the first part of the below) is not
in my view fair criticism against poor engineering results. it is a
baldly and badly expresssed personal opinion. Even if someone were
inclined to agree with you, there is no information there by which to
attempt to improve the process or results. Nor is there even any
detail of what you consider "stupid" about the protocols. Even the
use of the word "stupid" casts into question whether your note could
be considered fair criticism.
People have the right and even the obligation to criticize IETF
protocols. Both before and after publication as RFC. Recently, a
participant raised specific and clear security concerns with a
published RFC. That is what is supposed to happen.
Yours,
Joel
PS: I would normally simply ignore your largely content free remarks,
but I want to make sure that others realize that Miles' reaction is
shared by others.
And I thank you for that. :-)
Miles
On 11/1/2021 10:58 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Miles Fidelman wrote:
And the goal should be to prevent IETF perform meaningless
engineering such as development of stupid protocols, including but
not limited to, IPv6 and LISP.
Now THIS seems like a living example of something that is both
unprofessional AND uncivil.
Thank you very much for clarifying that requiring to be "professional"
or "civil" means prohibiting fair criticism against poor engineering
results.
Masataka Ohta
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
nothing works and no one knows why. ... unknown
