I believe I made quite a similar set of points off list to JFC soon after Harald proposed his 3683. I definitely agree that it appears there is a fundamental divergence between the mindset and protocols of this orgnaization and his ways. I guess it boild down to "should we stop trying to pound this square peg into that round hole? This doesn't appear to be working!" -Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On > Behalf Of Ole Jacobsen > Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 7:47 AM > To: JFC (Jefsey) Morfin > Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx; iesg@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: quick comments over Harald's use of RFC 3683 > > > JFC, > > Since I have engaged in debate with you on another list, > maybe I can offer some constructive criticism to perhaps make > you understand why people react the way they do, up to and > including this proposed action. > I have cc'd the IETF and IESG since I others may agree or > disagree with me and offer feedback to you privately or publically. > > 1. Your postings are Long, Rambling and Frequent (LRF). I > have a certain sympathy for people whose native language is > not English (like myself) when they post on these lists. > However, this usually results in fewer, not more words, a la > "We meet lunch 11 cafe?" In your case--and unlike in the > digital picture case--more words/pixels does not contribute > to the clarity of the image, quite the opposite in fact. > Rambling refers to your tendency to make references to > everything under the sun while discussing a given topic. > Frequent just adds to the irritation. It's not like anyone on > this list gets too little mail. > > 2. Your posting appears to come from a position where the > IETF "members" > collectively are just clueless, have not seen the light or > found their way to your particular techno-religion. Some call > this preaching, and in this case the choir is not appreciative. > > 3. Some of your postings can be read as personal attacks. > While some may call this your "debating style," there are > clearly instances when you cross the line. This really isn't > a good way to make friends with a large group of people. > > 4. Some of your arguments appear to be technical in nature, > but are incomprehensible even to our most respected experts. > It is of course POSSIBLE that they are wrong and you are > right, but if you are unable to explain your position even to > them after many rounds, does it not seem like you are wasting > your, their and our time? > > Thanks for listening. > > Ole > > > Ole J. Jacobsen > Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal Academic > Research and Technology Initiatives, Cisco Systems > Tel: +1 408-527-8972 GSM: +1 415-370-4628 > E-mail: ole@xxxxxxxxx URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf >
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf