RE: Last Call: draft-ietf-opsec-filter-caps (Filtering and Rate Limiting Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure) to BCP

["Barry Greene \(bgreene\)" <bgreene@cisco.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

There is no confusion on my part. I've been in and out of IETF work
since 1990. So I've very clear about my concerns and issues.

  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-opsec@psg.com [mailto:owner-opsec@psg.com] On 
> Behalf Of Danny McPherson
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 8:13 AM
> To: Ron Bonica
> Cc: opsec@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-opsec-filter-caps 
> (Filtering and Rate Limiting Capabilities for IP Network 
> Infrastructure) to BCP
> 
> 
> On Jun 28, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Ron Bonica wrote:
> 
> > Folks,
> >
> > Please disregard my previous email, instructing the authors 
> to publish 
> > as INFORMATIONAL. I hadn't read Danny's objection yet when 
> I sent that 
> > instruction.
> >
> > Danny, Barry, please continue this dialog and try to reach some 
> > consensus. In the mean time, I will retreat into my 
> smoke-filled room 
> > to figure out if there is any RFC that provides guidance in 
> case you 
> > can't reach consensus between one another.
> 
> Heh, no conspiracy theory here, honestly.  I think this is 
> just a matter of confusion about what documents represent 
> Standards Track and which don't.
> 
> And as you well know, 2026 is the place to start :-)
> 
> Thanks for clarification Ron.
> 
> -danny
> 
> 
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.1

iQA/AwUBRoPZuL/UEA/xivvmEQKPugCbBp4pFat7TXKTx3ovXmQNsYLuYXoAoNRS
EQpoONoJlmD16OL65gmPaHoU
=fpji
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----