Scott Lawrence wrote:
I don't think it's helpful for you to repeatedly try to shut down
attempts to get answers to questions that many people on the list have
repeatedly said that they think are relevant and important.
Sure it is. It is specifically helpful.
The questions constitute a denial of service attack on IETF operations.
In terms of principle, I and others have pointed out the basic flaw in asking
these types of question. The mere fact of having some questions does not
justify asking them and most certainly does not justify requiring that they be
answered.
In terms of pragmatics, you are missing the fact that there is an infinite
number of questions that one can ask and that it is not feasible to answer them,
nevermind require that they be answered.
In terms of management structure, these questions alter the historical
separation of labor that has existed in the IETF. Although it can be entirely
reasonable to make changes to management structure, this needs to be pursued as
a matter of policy and not ad hoc -- and by the way nationally biased --
opportunistic curiosity.
Hence, the implications of changing policy need to be addressed explicitly, with
an eye for later, potentially undesirable effects.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf