On Tuesday, April 16, 2002, at 04:39 , todd glassey wrote:
Ran you hit it on the head - "Your milages varies..." - this is a
standards
organization and not a place where we decide who we like and which of
their
projects we are going to allow to come through us today and not.
It is exactly how most standards organisations work.
That's not the way any other GLOBAL standards orgs work.
Not so.
Counter-examples to that claim include ISO, ITU-T, and IEEE --
each of which make decisions all the time about what proposals
and standards they want to work on or don't want to work on.
For example, to undertake standards work in IEEE, one must
(among other things) get the cognizant committee to approve
a Project Authorisation Request (PAR). PARs get denied, approved,
and revoked regularly by IEEE throughout each year.
It is however how
all of the privatized reccomendation services work, and the problem
here is
that you have hit the needle on the head. The IETF is not a fair and
equitible playing field by your very commentary.
Please don't put words into my mouth. That is not at all what I said.
I merely said that you disagreed -- which is your perogative (whether or
not
one's viewpoint is right, one can state a viewpoint in a free society).
Just because you have an opinion that you don't like IETF doesn't make
your claims true.
I think the IETF is quite fair and equitable --
nota bene: that doesn't mean that each person will like each decision,
but neither does each person participating in (IEEE, ITU-T, ISO) like
each
decision that gets made there. And in each case, the standards
organisation
has an appeal process to handle situations where one has a legitimate
issue about how the process was implemented.
I've also participated in IEEE work, particularly POSIX-related
matters.
It has slightly different practices than IETF, but decisions on what will
be undertaken or not undertaken, on what will be in the standard or not,
and so forth, occur all the time in IEEE SA. Sometimes I agreed with
those
decisions, other times not.
You would be more credible if you'd put your particular specific
detailed
issue on the table, rather than being coy about what decision got made
that
you didn't like. And you'd be more credible if you took any valid basis
for
appeal through the system -- rather than taking toy potshots from a
mailing
list -- all IMHO.
Ran