Masataka Ohta wrote on 2022-04-22 05:30:
Paul Vixie wrote:
such destructive statements as
IPv6 with unnecessarily lengthy 16B addresses without valid
technical reasoning only to make network operations prohibitively
painful is a garbage protocol.
and
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.
is protected by "the freedom of speech" and is not
"unprofessional" and is fully acceptable.
...
the above snippets in which ipv6 and lisp are designated "garbage
protocols" have a productivity error in that neither is actionable.
Action by IETF becomes possible only after some IETF consensus
is reached, which is obviously impossible for poor IPv6 and
LISP, because there are certain amount of people disparately
acting for them.
here, you demonstrate a commitment to nonconstructive commentary
("obviously impossible for poor IPv6 and LISP") and thus end my
participation in this thread. this is invective not argumentation and
i'll have no part in it. my reaction may be typical, in which case you
could infer much from the silence of others.
ohta-san, i will not permanently lose hope that you can learn to
associate constructively with your protocol development peers. but i
will continue to take months-long or years-long breaks to regenerate
such hope after each demonstration by you of nonconstructive and
unprofessional behaviour.
i support the actions of the co-chairs since they have acted within the
intent of the rules even if loopholes could be found by the motivated.
--
P Vixie
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
