Mr. Scott, IANAL. But I know when you hurt someone with others, all have to pay. 2005/10/17, Scott W Brim <swb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > OK, this is getting silly. Have you ever been to an IETF meeting? > You should understand the IETF culture before presuming to advise > governments. The IETF is not a puppet of any government, and even if > it were, that has nothing to do with RFC3683. I do not understand why you attack me? I advise Governments on what IETF says. Not on what the IETF does? But what IETF does is subject to laws. And the IETF disclaimer has no value in this case. > The Last Call was reissued precisely to support the rights of the > "accused" (your word). Because it was issued on the wrong list, some > people might not have seen it. It was given *more* exposure time, not > less, in order to be *more* fair, not less. Your implications that > the "rulers" and their lackeys are gaming the system to take away > rights is completely absurd. "accused" is not my word. I do not understand what you can name "more fair". Mr. Dean can claim it was less. And win. Things are fair or not. Mr. Dean can claim it is messy and win. I do not understand what are the rulers and the lackeys? I am not interested in dicussing RFC that way. Eduardo Mendez _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf