Re: As Promised, an attempt at 2026bis

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Keith,
>>
>> I could also imagine VERY incremental changes that are agreed to be
>> non-controversial.
>
> this is often how the second-system effect starts, and it nearly
> always works out badly.

I think the intersection of people and potentially agreeable changes is
incredibly small.  So do you apparently, as you discuss below.
>
>> My suggestion is that we first start by getting agreement on the
>> changes in the draft that are there, including two-step process Scott
>> & I have proposed, which I believe is a compromise between the
>> reality of a one step process and some peoples' desires. 
>
> well, I have my own idea about how to revise the standards process,
> which, while not totally dissimilar to yours, is different enough that
> you and I are not likely to be able to agree on a compromise without a
> fair amount of discussion.  and a few dozen other people probably have
> similar ideas.  so no, I don't think that getting agreement on your
> proposal is a good first step.

Propose your own.  I'm not stopping you.  And I think you're being
presumptuous about whether or not I'd like it or that we couldn't come
to some agreement.

Eliot

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]