Eliot,
So, this is a difference of opinion. There is no process in place through
which such things can be discussed at organization/organization level. The
IETF does not have a formal liaison process like the ITU, ETSI, or other
standards bodies. There is a liaison process, as I understand it. but it
has not worked so far, as far as I know.
So, I could come over as an individual and asked a question, I suppose.
However, would it matter what that answer is? I am not a liaison officer
between organizations. In short, it isn't my responsibility to go try to do
my day job and coordinate between multiple standards organizations.
Paul
_____
From: Eliot Lear [mailto:lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 1:56 AM
To: Paul E. Jones
Cc: dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net; 'Brian E Carpenter'; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: RFC 4612 - historic status
Paul E. Jones wrote:
I wonder how customers might react to seeing new gateway hardware produced
utilizing "historic" RFCs. What does that mean?
The statement from the IESG is that it means you did something you ought not
to have done. I believe we are now quibbling over the word "audio". What I
don't understand is why you didn't have this discussion with the RAI and APP
folk before the document was released and come up with a mutually agreeable
alternative. A spirit of cooperation would demand no less, right?
Eliot
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf