RE: Issue 272 resolution

["Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@comcast.net>]

> > In any case, I'm not married to this solution; I've repeatedly requested
> > suggestions for a solution to the problem but nobody else has brought any
> > forward.
>
> Nonsense. There were multiple suggestions offered, including the one
> you are re-proposing. They were all rejected. Some were rejected by you.

Indeed, it is difficult to see how the current proposed resolution is different from
a similar suggestion which was rejected after (laborious) WG
consensus calls at IETF 71 as well as on the WG mailing list.

I'm confused!  Is this in the way of a recommendation for a solution or are you just enjoying beating me with the "WG consensus" stick?  If the latter, please have fun, but you might take a moment to redefine the problem as non-existent by simply deleting the issue from the list.  In any case, I don't really care anymore: I've solved the problem (in a very ugly way) by defining the attributes for 802.16 PKMv1 support as (complex & redundant) legacy attributes since I really don't have time for this.  You see, I'm actually trying to do some engineering here; I don't know what you're trying to do, but I'm pretty sure it's not that.