Well, the one that really pushes my button is when someone, probably
a vendor, but even sometimes an operator, comes to the mic and says
"The Really Big SDO needs this work." Its impossible to know if this
person has any official standing at the Really Big SDO, or if it is
a possition that that person would just wish that SDO would take.
John
Two related points here - one is that we do have "official liasions"
on the IAB website (at http://www.iab.org/liaisons/index.html), so it
is theoretically possible to identify these liasions, but not everyone
knows about this, and not everyone thinks to look, and the second is
that a number of interesting communities don't have an official
liasion to/from the IETF, so John's statement very clearly applies in
these cases.
These communities may not even be SDOs - they can be operator
consortia, vendor consortia, industry consortia, or Lord knows what.
When I was attending 3GPP, Stephen Hayes was the official liasion, and
in my experience he was VERY conservative about saying "this is what
3GPP needs/wants/expects". Not everyone who stands at the microphone
is as consciencious as Stephen. I was in one working group meeting
yesterday where two people were arguing about the timeframe an
external SDO really expects from the IETF - that's not helpful to the
IETF or to the external SDO (who may get what it wants from the IETF,
or what someone thought it should want).
Thanks,
Spencer
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf