Phill,
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
...
The problem that arises with ADs is when they start insisting on silly
ideas that they are personally invested in like the jihad against NAT,
firewalls and anything else that 'breaks' the end-to-end principle.
I think this is immoderate use of language, to say the least.
There is a body of work from the IAB, not the IESG, about the deep
problems caused by NATs and other middleboxes. That doesn't mean that
the IESG has its head in the sand - the IETF has to deal with reality,
even when it's distasteful.
The
IESG rules mean that any AD can vote 'Discuss'.
Er, yes, I think it's known as collective responsibility in some
circles. It would happen much less often if WGs conducted their own
cross-area review before drafts were passed on to the IESG.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf