Subject: Re: [tcpm] closing WGLC for TCP-AO

From: Alfred Hönes <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 19:45:24 +0100 (MEZ)

At Wed, 2 Dec 2009 21:49:45 -0800, Chandrashekhar Appanna wrote:

>  The entire process asociated with this draft has been very odd.. on
>  all fronts it has shown exactly how the IETF should not do things.
>  The fact that one vocal and nagging individual can usurp and upset
>  the effort and the ideas that originated with others was definitely
>  odd to me..  I do not intend to debate or argue but since this is
>  an open forum and opnions are being stated, I want to put mine in
>  for the record too.
>
>  0.02 :)
>  Chandra.

+1

+1

+1

I also have been disappointed very much by the procedures and
stopped spending cycles for this effort more than a year ago,
after all suggestions -- even those having been acked before --
did not get acted upon orderly.

Ironically, whereas the draft (after eight update cycles) still
calls out being "Simple AO" in its page headers (and pretends having
a single author in the page footers), the protocol has become an
involved replication of functionality already present in other IETF
protocols, hiding the parallels to these by painfully avoiding to
use established terms like "security association", using the
euphemism "key ID" for the SPI, etc. ...

It appears to me that "acceptable" (to the author) discussion of the
draft essentially was limited to an "inner circle"; heated debates on
WG meetings were only cursory sketched in the minutes and never brought
to the list; the short on-list debates during the short time between
publication of the AO draft updates (precisely aligned with the IETF
cutoff date, or even later) and the subsequent IETF meetings did not
have great impact of the next version, which has not been published
until everybody with other day jobs almost had forgotten the on-list
discussions 4 months earlier.

Also waiting for IETF LC to step in ...

   Alfred.

-- 

+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys.  |
| Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18         |
| D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  [email-masked]                     |
+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:40:19 -0800

Alfred ? wrote:
...
> a single author in the page footers), 

Thanks - that'll be updated.

...
> to the list; 

I can provide a list of detailed posts with long lists of action items
raised at the meetings that were sent to the list if you like.

I appreciate that you may have missed them, having decided to drop out
of the discussion, but that doesn't mean they weren't sent to the list
on many occasions.

> the short on-list debates during the short time between

I kept a list of issues raised and resolutions, and updated the doc
accordingly. Those updates were included in the forward of the doc until
recently - as they became prohibitively large. I can provide them if needed.

> Also waiting for IETF LC to step in ...

WG LC has a purpose. You and EKR were silent during it. Now you want to
use IETF LC as a substitute? Check the process rules - I know I will.

Joe