Re: Last Call: 'Progressive Posting Rights Supsensions' to BCP (draft-carpenter-rescind-3683)

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

 



John C Klensin wrote:
>From my place in the galleries, it appears to me that there have
been a very small number of attempts to assert the 3683
mechanism.  Each has resulted in a firestorm of debate that has
arguably caused far more traffic, noise, and disruption to the
relevant mailing lists than the individual who was contemplated
to be banned.  Control mechanisms that are intended to protect
mailing lists from disruption but that cause far more disruption
than they cure --at least for the lengthy period that they are
under consideration, discussion, and appeal -- are not within my
definition of a good mechanism.  YMMD, of course.
From my place, there have been exactly 2 attempts to assert the 3683 mechanism.
One did not raise much of a controversy. The other one did.

Apart from that, I think I have already stated my opinions on draft-carpenter-rescind in enough detail.

               Harald


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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