On Thu, December 3, 2009 12:24 pm, Alan DeKok wrote: > Dan Harkins wrote: >> I refer you to my previous statements made on this list for my >> concerns with the document which are current and unaddressed. > > I asked for clarification, and you claim that my attempts to discuss > those clarifications are "tangents" and "straw men".
Because they are, in fact, tangents and straw men. I have no desire to enter into those discussions. > This doesn't make me believe that there are issues with the document. So what? > I suggest posting a detailed review of the document, explaining why > the current text is inadequate, and which text you suggest as > replacement. Simply replacing one paragraph out of context is > insufficient. Your stated concerns with that paragraph are directly > addressed by existing text elsewhere in the document. I already said why the text is inadequate-- once again, I refer you to the statements I previously made on this list. And I even backed up my use of the word "vague" to describe the problematic text (which you did not when you, cutely, turned around and used that same term to describe my suggested text). My concerns are not addressed elsewhere in the document. Dan. _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
