yes, but we have that problem with *every* working group whose decisions
affects those whose core interest is not that group. nat, midcom,
dhcp, dns* are all examples of efforts that have the power to change the
basic services that are used by other layers - and have a potentially
adverse effect on the ability of the Internet to support existing or new
applications.
Agreed, but in theory at least the ADs, the IESG as a whole, and the IAB are
supposed to look out for that sort of thing (whether we succeed is another
question). That doesn't work for the process because those are exactly the
same people as have a vested interest in the process.
good point.
again, I'm fine with shutting down poisson but I think we need to find
better ways to address some of the problems that poisson tried to address -
and simply moving the discussion to the IETF list is not IMHO sufficient.
No, and that wasn't Harald's proposal - as I read it, it was to take the
discussion to an ad hoc WG after exposing the issue on the main list.
well, I guess I have a couple of items I'd like to see on that WG's
charter.
Keith