[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Possible RFC 3683 PR-action

2008-03-26 10:57:19

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org 
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Michael Thomas

          Mike, could be a dog too

I'm not sure what you people have against canines - if a dog can email in 
cohesive comments on a draft or working group topic, I say we should listen!  ;)

The issue here is not one of identity for email/discussion, but rather one of 
identity for consensus declaration.  In other words, I don't see anything wrong 
with letting anonymous/random beings communicate ideas to the IETF through 
email or jabber or whatever.  What gets tricky is a WG chair basing consensus 
or interest on the email list traffic.  The problem is how consensus is 
determined, not how we identify contributors.

In the IEEE 802 groups, they have (or used to when I went) a policy of anyone 
can comment, but you have to physically go to a certain number of meetings per 
year, and continue doing so, to be counted as an actual voting member. (but 
anyone from anywhere could become such a member if they participated)  That 
worked pretty well, because often times they still went with consensus but only 
pulled out the "voting members only" policy when something could not be so 
resolved.  I realize that physically going to IETF meetings is not a model we 
want, but for people who don't go, we could require vetting of identity to get 
voting status.

p.s. And I for one welcome our new dog overlords.  I'd like to remind them that 
as a former cat-owner, I can be helpful in rounding up cats to toil in their 
dog pounds.

IETF mailing list