--On Thursday, September 03, 2009 6:28 PM -0700 David Kessens
<david(_dot_)kessens(_at_)nsn(_dot_)com> wrote:
John,
On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 07:33:37PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
Instead, it was about the
behavior of the Trustees and their interactions with the IETF
Community. _That_ discussion is better carried out on the
IETF list, in plain sight of the community, even that portion
who do not feel personally compelled to track the of IPR
policies.
While you seem to imply that you can determine for the rest of
us on the IETF list what is, and what is not a topic of
general interest for the IETF community, I would not like to
let this statement pass unchallenged.
David, I meant to imply no such thing. Let me explain a little
better the distinction I am trying to draw. I think it is
perfectly reasonable for the Trustees to move a discussion of
the content of the Trust Licensing Policy, or other such
matters, to a separate list. They have done so and I have no
objection at all.
On the other hand, the appeal addresses issues of whether the
Trustees/IAOC and their behavior are in compliance with BCP 101,
especially its provisions about openness, transparency, and
responsiveness to the community. That issue affects the entire
community and as such, IMO, ought to be visible to the same
community that approved BCP 101, authorized the creation of the
IASA, and laid down the rules by which it is supposed to
operate. For the Trustees to decide (i) to not respond in
specific terms to the appeal (see Thomas Narten's note) and (ii)
to take the discussion to a place where few people will see it
essentially preempts that appear and the right to appeal. I'm
not making any determination for anyone about what traffic they
should read, or even what is of general interest. I do,
however, object strenuously to a decision by the Trustees to
move discussion of that sort of appeal against their behavior to
a list where the discussion will presumably be drowned by legal
hairsplitting about the TLP itself.
YMMD, of course, but that was my reasoning and intent.
I fully support the idea of moving this discussion to another
public mailing list.
While I would not be enthused, I would consider moving the
discussion to a dedicated public mailing list, or a mailing list
focused on BCP 101, to be plausible. I believe that moving it
to a list dedicated to discussions of the TLP to be dismissing
the entire point of the appeal.
Again, YMMD.
best,
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf