On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Henning Brauer <hb-nanog@bsws.de> wrote:
* Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> [2014-05-08 04:36]:
I don’t believe for one second that the IESG refused to deal with ‘em.
you're free to believe whatever you want and ignore facts.
I do believe the IESG did not hand them everything they wanted on a silver platter in contravention of the established consensus process and that they failed to gain the consensus they wanted as easily as they hoped.
lie.
I was the IESG member responsible for the VRRP working group when the OpenBSD developer (I'm sorry, Henning, I forget if it was you or someone else) came to a VRRP WG meeting and demanded that the IETF handle the patent issue with VRRP. We described the IETF's IPR process and that the policy is explicitly not to do what was being requested, and the response was more or less "well, then we'll have to fix the problem for you". At later meetings I heard buzz about how the developers intended CARP to interfere with VRRP, with the philosophical position that VRRP wasn't a protocol. When I first saw the claims that IANA told OpenBSD that you had to have deep pockets to get a protocol number, I asked the IANA to share the original request and any related correspondence with the IESG. They could not find any such correspondence in the raw archive of the iana@iana.orgmailbox. While the OpenBSD project has done an incredible amount of good on the Internet, the version of events described by the 3.5 release song does not match my personal experiences. Bill