> COOK: good lord keith.... Surely stef's whole point is that the
Area Directors, IESG, and IAB need only accept work that WAS good
enough from THEIR own point of view.
it sounds like you are saying that it simply is not possible to
construct anything that could even merit IETF review unless you did
the construction from scratch within all the channels of the IETF?
No, I'm only saying that it's wrong to encourage people to do their
work independently of IETF if they want/expect IETF to endorse it.
When other groups do standards work, that work should bear the name
of the group that did the work. IETF's name should not be used to
lend credibility to other groups.
OK....now to me at least your answer is clear and much harder to
quibble with......
but did i misunderstand steff?
thought he was suggesting that work developed outside could be
brought to the IETF structure that was well baked and mature and that
the keepers of the structure might at least want to entertain the
possibility that it could be scrutinized and that, if found worthy,
an IETF blessed version emerge?
If so it sounds like you are determined to keep the views of the
current AD's, IESG and IAB as a gate through which ALL ideas must
pass and are saying that it is flat out impossible for anyone to
develop working code that could pass the scrutiny test.
Not at all. I'm just saying that we shouldn't call it IETF work when
it's done elsewhere.
Keith
--
****************************************************************
The COOK Report on Internet, 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA
(609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) cook(_at_)cookreport(_dot_)com Index to 9 years
of the COOK Report at http://cookreport.com From now
through Sept 30th
half price sale on university library site license and access to ALL
back issues.
Site license $575 and all back issues $300. http://cookreport.com/sale.shtml
****************************************************************