On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 01:21:32PM -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Sorry, I don't consider the IAB and the IESG to be bodies put in place
to write opinion pieces. I consider them to be [...]
The IAB certainly publishes opinions. The IESG basically publishes the
IETF's opinions.
BTW, I think the choice of 1984 as an RFC number was atypically juvenile.
So what? Have you seen the names they give to... laws, military
operations, and all sorts of things? Have you seen our WG names? Yeah,
it's OK. And anyways, RFC1984's number is not juvenile, but a cultural
clue as to what it says, and it's a handy mnemonic.
I don't think anyone outside the echo-chamber has taken RFC1984 seriously,
regardless of its status; instead, the opinions it described have been
adopted because the alternatives it argues against are inherently stupid.
The 90s crypto wars ended on the side of RFC1984. Are you saying that
RFC1984 came close to derailing that? Do you have any proof that the
chorus of voices against Clipper and such had no impact?
The new crypto wars will too end the same way, if only because the
alternative is simply untenable for practical reasons. Perhaps we
don't have to say anything. But better safe than sorry.
Nico
--