yeah, I sympathize with the desire to be less vulnerable to asymmetric
attacks, and also with the general notion that if your appeal has
sufficient merit to sway the iesg, iab, etc then you can probably find
some people outside those bodies who think your appeal has merit.
I also believe that if "just anyone" can declare that an appeal has
merit, the nutcases will band together to support one another.
I just don't think that IETF meeting attendance is an appropriate way to
decide who is a nutcase and who isn't.
-------- Original Message --------
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 10:31:57AM +0200, Frank Ellermann wrote:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kolkman-appeal-support
...it's just wrong.
I think he's got a good idea. It maybe could use some tweaking.
The IETF should stop doing things that are not relevant to its
constituency and serve only to waste its (donated) time-dollars.
This includes but is not limited to: appeals from total nuts.
One perfectly acceptable tactic, which Olafur has codified in this
draft, is to limit appeals to only those made by mixed nuts.
I think it would be more productive to suggest alternative tactics
than to ask Olafur to withdraw his draft. We would all like to
know what other options there are.
I didn't try to find three "paying members" to
support that opinion, and nobody else is "qualified" to support it :-(
...nor would you have had to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf