Keith Moore wrote:
The words "They also include criticizing an idea in an insulting or
excessively hostile manner" are troubling. I realize that one may
criticize an idea in such a way as to effectively be critical of the
person proposing the idea. And yet, it is essential that people be
able to discuss ideas candidly, and sometimes to criticize ideas
emphatically. I believe it's inappropriate to impugn a
participant's motive without supporting evidence of that motive. But
I don't believe it's wrong to point out any problem with an idea
itself, nor with potential ill effects of an idea, nor even with the
appearance of an idea. Sometimes this is a fine line, but it's
essential that the SAAs not interfere with vigorous discussion of
relevant ideas.
Let me try.
IPv6 with unnecessarily lengthy 16B addresses without valid
technical reasoning only to make network operations prohibitively
painful is a garbage protocol.
LISP, which perform ID to locator mapping, which is best
performed by DNS, in a lot less scalable way than DNS
is a garbage protocol.
Masataka Ohta
