Hi, I noticed this bit of your message, and it made me think.
> With regards to your points about its all already developed – are you really > telling me that because the authors chose to go and spend ages developing > something while taking zero cognizance of the consensus in the community on > both the semantics of addresses and issues like header insertion and removal > – just because you ignored them and wrote the code we are now meant to rubber > stamp it? Rough consensus and running code... But we work by rough consensus. Running code that explicitly goes against consensus is no IETF standard at al. Cheers, Sander
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
