Subject: "Bullshit on both quotes."

From: "Mike O'Dell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 15:30:07 -0400 (EDT)

both quotes were made, both are accurate

the fact a lot of people don't understand doesn't make either untrue

for instance, gravity works whether you understand or not.

likewise, Internet things work because you are in league with the
underlying physics.  if you aren't, no amount of supplication will help you
because

	"Nature neither seeks nor abides your opinion."

if jamal's assertion about the new formulation of "the organization
formerly known as the IETF" is correct, it won't matter because it
will be obviously true.  if he is wrong, it won't matter that way
either because of irrelevance.

and keep repeating - there is nothing sacred about the IETF.
the IETF has no patent on how it sometimes gets things done.
if you like the approach, please feel free to use it when and
where ever you feel so inspired.  you don't need the IETF's
permission to innovate and you certainly aren't required to 
do it in any particular fashion.

the IETF does have a culture and tradition which is well-established
and like many other such groups, some of us have little patience with
mob-based cultural imperialism, especially when clothed as
"democratic processes".

as for sitting on pin-points, after mastering discussions
about angels and pin-heads, some of us have moved on to 
even greater challenges.

	cheers,
	-mo

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 14:56:59 -0500

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike O'Dell" <[email-masked]>
> do it in any particular fashion.

IPv8 == 8+8 == 6to4 ???

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/759/ipj_3-1/ipj_3-1_routing.html

Jim Fleming
http://www.unir.com
Mars 128n 128e
http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12223.html

---

From: jamal <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 17:10:27 -0400 (EDT)

> 	"Nature neither seeks nor abides your opinion."

If you repeat some things many times, you start believing them. By
implication, they become accurate. Soon it becomes natural to just parrot
them without analysis of the message. It is called the Big Lie.
I think if WG chairs are mandated (where it makes sense) to have running
code at some point, then the Big Lie will have some truth.
In the worst case they should have interop sessions for those large
organizations that want to get the advantage of their "IPR" and just keep
it to themselves.
I dont mean to put down WGs who adhere to these standards (the IPSEC folks
and SCTP come to mind); i am just saying that "running code" should cease
being a battle cry. Perhaps with the permission of Dave Clark someone
should qualify his stamement with "we believe in running code
(sometimes)".

> do it in any particular fashion.

Oh, I love the IETF's way of doing things. I wish we could have as many
rude people in larger organizations. Things will get done. Things get
done at the IETF.
And dont misunderstand me, i love the IETF. It's probably the only
conference i look forward to attending. Always.

> mob-based cultural imperialism, especially when clothed as

Hmm.. Are you saying the IETF is lacking from mob-based imperialism?
Or would you prefer to close your eyes and call it democracy?
I think a great technique to get things done at the IETF is to have a
marketing orator putting forward a proposal with about 20 people from her
organization humming along for the consensus.
For example, i dont have a problem with OPES. there are questionable
ethical questions that get opened up. And i am glad someone is looking
out for all of us. OTOH, i really think we need to move on and evolve.
I dont think OPES was cooked out of magical hand waving rather because
there are marketing requireemnts deriving the need (and i could be
totaly wrong, magical hand waving does happen at the IETF).
Lets fix whatever is wrong and keep going. I have a problem with ludists
hiding behind purism. And what a great way to show it than to point
fingers at those who dont follow the Righteous Path.

> about angels and pin-heads, some of us have moved on to

Hehehe. You have to admit religious connotations are part of the
IETF culture. Thanks for being cool headed.

cheers,
jamal

---

From: "Scott Brim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2001 17:57:52 -0400

> code at some point, then the Big Lie will have some truth.

4.1.2  Draft Standard

   A specification from which at least two independent and interoperable
   implementations from different code bases have been developed, and
   for which sufficient successful operational experience has been
   obtained, may be elevated to the "Draft Standard" level.