Patrik Fältström wrote:
So I do not think IETF should be the slightest worried ISOC is doing
something here without coordination. And without visibility to the IETF.
I don't know about anyone else, but I wasn't expressing worry. I was noting
that the activity wasn't discussed with the broader IETF beforehand and that
such a discussion before making strategic decisions can be useful. I'll stress
again that I'm not crazy enough to think that the IETF "plenary" should have a
veto on ISOC choices, but merely that pro-active (pre-hoc, rather than post-hoc)
discussion could be productive.
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> people I knew
> who are experts in the identity management area never thought that
> the IETF was relevant except as a source of atomic components.
A significant -- and probably insightful -- assessment of the IETF...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf