Behalf Of Dave Crocker
Reflecting on the various postings, so far, here is what
seems likely to happen at the BOF:
1. We will get some presentations, explaining things that we
should have read before coming to the BOF.
You mean like people should read Internet drafts before making comments?
2. Audience participation will immediately bog down about a)
related work, b) intended goals, and c) security risks.
You mean that the face to face discussion will address the three
principle issues that are relevant to the proposal.
And that's why they need to be discussed *before* there is a
BOF. The amount of time in a BOF does not permit real
discussion, of the type called for, here.
Good point, lets do away with all face to face meetings until the
proposers are ready for last call.
Given the particular nature, complexity, and controversy
surrounding the topic of online identities, the second BOF
will, at best, be only marginally more productive.
This line of argument is somewhat insulting. If you do not understand
the issues concerned then please by all means stay away until you feel
that you understand them sufficiently to contribute.
I usually take the view that if one does not understand something the
best approach is to listen to people who might. In person presentations
are considerably more effective for this purpose than email.
While I cannot claim any significant experience in the field of
'identity' I think I can fairly claim to make a definitive contribution
with respect to the question of prior work as the principle non-IETF
works being cited all bear my name as editor. The proposal being made
here is not in conflict with those initiatives and is complimentary in
Ietf mailing list