On May 30, 2011, at 11:48 PM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja(_at_)bogus(_dot_)com>
wrote:
But you've contributed to this document, so have others from that list.
I don't want to contribute to the document because - in my opinion, and
speaking only for myself - I don't think it can be made into a balanced
assessment of the issue without major changes.
I do things that the ietf says are a bad idea all the time, I take the concerns
expressed in informational documents that I've read under-advisement when I do
so.
Since a) I don't have even a fraction of the time I would need to actually
contribute said changes, b) the document is already in an advanced state of
the IETF process, and c) it doesn't matter so much what the document ends up
saying, because most of the organizations for whom this is an issue have
already looked at the data and recognized that they have no alternative, I
was simply steering clear of the document entirely.
It's true that I have pointed out things I think are incorrect. But I did not
view these as contributions, more as offering occasional token opposition
lest silence be interpreted as assent. :-) But perhaps you're right and I
should not comment on it at all.
Cheers,
Lorenzo
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf