ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Complaints Against The IESG and The RFC-Editor About Publication of RFC-2188 (ESRO)

2006-03-19 10:44:32
I too agree with Mohsen's comments, overall. What Mohsen points out as true
eight years ago continues to be true even now. Not a lot changed, IMHO. I
believe, it had gotten worse. IESG continues to wield enormous influence over
the independent submissions sent to the RFC editor. The RFC editor needs to be
independent.

regards,
suresh

--- Mohsen BANAN 
<lists-ietf(_at_)mohsen(_dot_)banan(_dot_)1(_dot_)byname(_dot_)net> wrote:


On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 04:56:57 +0100, Harald Alvestrand
<harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no> said:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 21:10:10 -0800, Dave Crocker 
<dhc2(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
said:

  Harald> What's the point of reposting this message now?

  Dave> Seems like there ought to be a statute of limitations.

In response to both of you: the point of referring
to eight-year old history is not to disinter the
corpse of the past.

The point is that this history is directly
relevent to a current discussion thread.

I believe I made the point of reposting clear in
the following header:

  Mohsen> [ This is a repost from 6 Nov 1998.
  Mohsen>   In particular the section on:
  Mohsen>      o Separate The RFC Publication Service from the IETF/IESG/IAB.
  Mohsen>   is relevant to the current:
  Mohsen>        STRAW PROPOSAL RFC Editor charter
  Mohsen>   thread. ]

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf





_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>