Right, that is the foced outcome of the current practice. Without an
independent channel, people find other avenues outside the IETF to get their
work done.
regards,
suresh
--- "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb(_at_)cs(_dot_)columbia(_dot_)edu> wrote:
On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 09:42:50 -0800 (PST), Pyda Srisuresh
<srisuresh(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com> wrote:
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.
Why? There are plenty of other publication venues.
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf