RFC 2418, "IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures", states:
Participation is by individual technical contributors, rather than by
formal representatives of organizations.
I take that to mean that IETF activities are separate from employment
activities.
that's what it means. however -
It's one thing to talk to Joe Schmoe about his work in IETF, quite another
thing to talk to Joe Schmoe of Femtosoft about his work in IETF. If you're
going to mention Joe's employer in the article, his employer might care
about what is being said. Joe might be doing the IETF work on his own
time (this is unusual but not unheard of) and/or doing work which is not
entirely aligned with his employer's interests. The reporter would usually
like to mention Joe's employer, believing (rightly or wrongly) that this
gives more credibility to the article. But if Joe is pursuing his own
agenda at IETF (again, this is more common than many people think) then
it wouldn't necessarily be appropriate to associate Joe's employer with that
work.
Nobody is required to talk to reporters. Unfortunately the trade press has
a bad reputation for mis-representing technical issues and for placing
far too much attention on irrelevant activities and thoroughly brain-damaged
ideas. out of frustration from seeing their statements misrepresented and
even misquoted, some people have adopted a policy of not talking to reporters
at all. It's hard to blame them.
Just because this is IETF policy doesn't mean that the employer agrees or
even understands this. How many employees are going to sit down with the
appropriate people from their company and work out in detail just what they
can say (in the context of pure IETF work) or cannot say (in the context
of their employer's work) just so they can talk to the press? It's a lot
of trouble and they're not getting much in return...
When people give you a reason for not doing some favor, most would rather
cite some external authority than say "I don't want to do this". In many
cultures it is considered impolite to say the latter.
Keith