I too agree with Mohsen's comments, overall. What Mohsen points out as true eight years ago continues to be true even now. Not a lot changed, IMHO. I believe, it had gotten worse. IESG continues to wield enormous influence over the independent submissions sent to the RFC editor. The RFC editor needs to be independent. regards, suresh --- Mohsen BANAN <lists-ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>>> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 04:56:57 +0100, Harald Alvestrand > <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > >>>>> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 21:10:10 -0800, Dave Crocker <dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > said: > > Harald> What's the point of reposting this message now? > > Dave> Seems like there ought to be a statute of limitations. > > In response to both of you: the point of referring > to eight-year old history is not to disinter the > corpse of the past. > > The point is that this history is directly > relevent to a current discussion thread. > > I believe I made the point of reposting clear in > the following header: > > Mohsen> [ This is a repost from 6 Nov 1998. > Mohsen> In particular the section on: > Mohsen> o Separate The RFC Publication Service from the IETF/IESG/IAB. > Mohsen> is relevant to the current: > Mohsen> STRAW PROPOSAL RFC Editor charter > Mohsen> thread. ] > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf