Ned,
Please help me understand your reasoning:
We participate in the IETF as individuals, not as corporate represenatives.
As such, asking about [company] product plans on the WG mailing is
completely and totally inappropriate.
Are you really trying to discourage asking questions of self-selected
designated experts?
Suppose XYZ corporation makes popular software for IP checksums, but
their algorithms only work for packet lengths less than 20. If Robin Doe
works for XYZ corporation and has voluntarily become an official of
the checksum working group, and that working group has published
documents clearly indicating that checksum algorithms must be able to
accomodate packets of at least size 40, why is it not appropriate to
ask Robin whether XYZ corporation intends to support the requirement?
Your implication that there should be a prior restraint on allowable
questions is not only at odds with interpretations of the scientific
method which insist on transparency, but is also contrary to Article
27(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
If your reasoning is based on the possible existence of non-disclosure
agreements, please say so. I think we need to have a clear discussion
about which kinds of NDAs are compatible with IESG duty.
Cheers,
James