Re: warning suggestions for draft-bberry-pppoe-credit

Vernon Schryver <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.pppext
Message-ID <[email protected]>
> From: Karl Fox <[email protected]>

> Frankly, I agree with Vern.  Why can't the WG simply tell the IESG  
> that it's a bad idea because the need is based on a defective product  
> design?  Surely they'd understand that--they're protocol designers,  
> too.  Who knows, maybe they'd say no, too.

I see reasons not to tell the IESG "No":

 - The IESG might refuse to go along, which would encourage more results
    like PPPoE itself.  (I have no recollections of debate about PPPoE
    here.  Am I wrong in thinking it bypassed this WG?)

 - If the IESG went along, the idea would be published in some
    "PPPoE Forum" as the best thing since sliced bread and without any
    caveats, and perhaps even without the improvements that have been
    made to it here.

 - We should save our very limited power to say "No" and mean it
    for worse things.


Vernon Schryver    [email protected]

_______________________________________________
Pppext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.