Re: ideas getting shot down

[Michael Thomas <mat at cisco.com>]

Keith Moore wrote:
> Paul Vixie wrote:
>   
>
> > which is why i'm proposing a standard of "demonstrable immediate harm" rather
> > than the current system of "that's not how you should do it" or "that's not
> > how i would do it".
> >   
> >     
> That's the wrong standard, it sets the bar way too low.  IETF shouldn't
> endorse anything unless it has justification to believe it is good; IETF
> should not discourage anything unless it has justification to believe it
> is bad.   And that justification should come from engineering analysis
> (or measurement, if it's feasible).  Sadly, a lot of people in IETF do
> not have engineering backgrounds and don't understand how to do such
> analysis.  This is something we need to change in our culture.
>   

Feh, From ietf-bounces at ietf.org Wed Sep 19 13:25:24 2007
Return-path: <ietf-bounces at ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IY39S-0004Ri-2Q; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:15:50 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY39Q-0004Qe-QD
	for ietf at ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:15:48 -0400
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.140])
	by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY39P-0007rR-Js
	for ietf at ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:15:48 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,274,1186351200"; d="scan'208";a="153606877"
Received: from ams-dkim-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.138])
	by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Sep 2007 19:15:44 +0200
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150])
	by ams-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l8JHFi8W017254; 
	Wed, 19 Sep 2007 19:15:44 +0200
Received: from adsl-247-3-fixip.tiscali.ch (ams3-vpn-dhcp142.cisco.com
	[10.61.64.142])
	by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l8JHFhtV005360; 
	Wed, 19 Sep 2007 17:15:44 GMT
Message-ID: <46F1592D.5020207 at cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 19:15:25 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear at cisco.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Vixie <paul at vix.com>
References: <11452.1189607641 at marajade.sandelman.ca>	<61769.1189616824 at sa.vix.com>	<3009e5840709121107o78cdd94fu907ab4de187b5d78 at mail.gmail.com>	<46E90E04.30000 at piuha.net>	<0F18F924-0B75-4F7C-9DCF-2759E9CECB61 at cs.ucla.edu>	<46EDFEC0.4060308 at piuha.net>
	<07ea01c7fa05$e68ae030$b3a0a090$ at net>	<p06240600c315a807196a at [98.207.7.244]>	<42439.1190137947 at sa.vix.com>
	<46F04CCE.6010503 at cs.utk.edu> <40387.1190163044 at sa.vix.com>
In-Reply-To: <40387.1190163044 at sa.vix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=673; t=1190222144;
	x=1191086144; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim1002;
	h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;
	d=cisco.com; i=lear at cisco.com;
	z=From:=20Eliot=20Lear=20<lear at cisco.com>
	|Subject:=20Re=3A=20mini-cores=20(was=20Re=3A=20ULA-C)
	|Sender:=20; bh=xroJhBe6Wk7gL7zgL72mMEANZkmHN/LZyJGNtjqpTMA=;
	b=l+i/ICcZDILCGWPML+IN2FR4OlqGh17mRS8ctgoksxKfIle6zK/k5lGlj3qAUIm88lZm2Som
	ZshjOC5xGLYqezUMg4990x9G7IWNyBg/XT/nAhdA5b1jdyRZTwq0kTj3;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=lear at cisco.com; dkim=pass (s
	ig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; ); 
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c
Cc: 'IETF Discussion' <ietf at ietf.org>
Subject: Re: mini-cores (was Re: ULA-C)
X-BeenThere: ietf at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces at ietf.org

Paul Vixie wrote:
> without a consensus on what it means "to harm", we're sort of stuck.  ULA-G
> (and therefore ULA-C) would allow consenting adults to exchange routes using
> the whois and in-addr infrastructure that has historically been reserved for
> "public networking".
>   

Without going into debate about consenting adults, and while I might 
disagree with Paul in certain fine points, I'd suggest that we consider 
the ULA-G proposal within the IETF and ask that Paul submit it as an 
I-D.  ULA-G could have broad application if in fact we solve the 
multihoming problem (IMHO) and I'd like to be the optimist and say that 
we can do that.

Eliot

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf