FWIW, while I think that I may be even more concerned than Scott
is --partially as a matter of personality and partially because
I've seen what I consider more symptoms-- we are in basic
agreement about the problem and the concerns. This is really
about Trust behavior vis-a-vis the community (or communities) it
is expected to serve and from which it is expected to take
direction and less about one particular document. Put
differently, the document is flawed but the process that
produced it and the way that process handles input are much more
seriously problematic.
john
--On Monday, July 20, 2009 09:05 -0400 "Scott O. Bradner"
<sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu> wrote:
Some history that may explain some of my and some other
reaction to the recent postings by the Trust
When the Trust was formed a number of us were quite worried
that it would begin to see itself as self directed and not as
a function whose purpose was to act at the direction of and in
support of the IETF.
My own reaction to the recent postings from the Trust is that
the Trust is moving in the direction that some of us were
worried about -- the Trust posts a bunch of proposed changes
out of the blue. Out of the blue because I did not see any
posting that explained why they felt that they needed to make
changes or that these specific changes were in response to
...
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf