Re: RFC 8252 is a complete joke

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 5 Jul 2023 at 16:52, Michael Thomas <mike@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
As I stated from the very beginning, this was a complete process failure of the IESG. So, yes it is very pertinent to the IETF list. It is even worse than I thought at first as two AD's noticed the same idiocy as I did except that they voted not to block the BCP. This discussion belongs here, not anywhere else as they were not security AD's. The keyword here is "procedural". Also: "no dedicated mailing lists exist". Failures of the IESG in general have nothing to do with any of the lists you cite.

There has also been discussion about how to get beyond OAUTH and the use of passwords in general. The keywords here are "technical" and "operational".

Mike, ban me if you feel like it but at least make it public so others will know what's going on

I apologise if I was not clear. Hopefully this is better:
  • IETF Process failures -> appropriate for this list
  • Authentication problems and possible solutions -> not appropriate, please move to OAUTH, SECDISPATCH or SAAG
The thread started with the former but when I posted the recent discussion had mostly been about the latter. I recognise having three possible destinations risks fragmenting the interested participants, so once you settle on the right place it would be a good idea to follow up on this thread letting people know where it is being taken.

Chris

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux