Dear all, On reflection, I would like to send a clarification to my previous email.
I didn’t want to see the conversation going all the way back to the beginning and covering the same ground again, so I responded to this email in haste. In particular in relation to this comment: > > I don’t think even those who are most aggressively opposed to the viewpoint I > am espousing here would agree with you that "any logging however, if not done > as a temporary measure to understand and enhance a protocol would potentially > discourage communication”. It is a mischaracterisation to represent those with whom I have been engaged as “aggressively opposed” to my viewpoint. I think we have covered a lot of ground here and both positions have been put forward with gusto but never aggressively. I would also like to say that I think that this has been a very worthwhile discussion. This comment subtracts from the value of the discussion and I apologise for that. daveor _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
