|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: FW: Suspension of posting rights for Jim Fleming
thanks for the techi response - its appreciated and the first i've received. Fleming can't post here but he is monitoring so maybe he can respond in private to us. Cheers Joe Baptista -- Planet Communications & Computing Facility a division of The dot.GOD Registry, Limited On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 [email protected] wrote: > On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 09:46:46 EDT, Joe Baptista said: > > > Does not change the fact no one has yet challenged him on the technical > > issues he's raised. They just complain about his posting habits etc. etc. > > OK. Want a technical issue? He's not allowed to redefine the 8-bit TOS > field as 2 4-bit address extensions, since he doesn't give a spec of how > an intermediate router is supposed to know which way to interpret the TOS > field, nor does he suggest an API change or DNS interface changes (for all > his babbling about using AAAA records, those are defined to carry IPv6 > addresses, he'll have to find some other way to carry his IPv8 addresses). > Oh wait.. that's two technical issues, and they've been pointed out to Jim > before, multiple times, and Jim's never bothered fixing his proposal to > deal with them. > > The part about his posting habits is the fact that he insists on re-hashing > the SAME ideas even after he's been told multiple times exactly why his > ideas won't work (see the above paragraph). It's especially annoying when > he insists on dragging his ideas into totally unrelated threads. > > > I expect Jim will be thrown out of many more conferences before the year > > is done. > > Drunks are thrown out of bars all the time too. I'm not sure that you > really want to make this point. > > > Now if you'd like to challenge him on the technical issues - why don't we > > take this private with Jim? I'll watch and ask questions. > > We'll be more than happy to do so once Jim shows the slightest sign of > interest in fixing his proposal to deal with the technical arguments that > have *already* been made. Most engineers have learned there is little to > be gained in fine-tuning the valve timing on a gasoline-powered internal > combustion engine when the pistons and crankshaft are missing... > > Give it a rest, Joe. > > >
|