The MPLS WG Archive

[Curtis Villamizar <curtis@workhorse.fictitious.org>]

In message <3A4234F2.C3F7923E@cypress.com>, Pankaj K Jha writes:
> 
> By the way, who is urging us to "move on to the next problem" after
> giving a half-baked solution to the current problem? It is always the
> person wanting to move on to the next problem. No one else is asking him
> to do that. Industry never says - I depend on you to keep generating
> document, don't worry how bad they are - for the coming generation will
> inherit them and fix them if they want to do it - you just keep typing
> away :-)


None of us get paid by the pounds of documents generated and claiming
that a wording nit in a non-normative architecture document makes
something a half baked solution is ridiculous.

If someone proposes an editorial change to provide better clarity,
that's fine.  Editorial changes can be made.

If someone wants to reorganize documents with no technical basis
because if violates their sense of architectural purity, then
entertaining such a request just wastes the valuable time of WG
contributors.

Curtis

ps - We are wasting the valuable time of WG contributors by continuing
this thread.  Nothing of substance has come out of it.  If someone
wants to propose editorial changes that clarify the existing optional
use of the IPv4 L3PID please do so.