Simon: > >> > Since IETF does not vote, it is certainly not an issue here? > >> > >> This is not totally true. A WG Chair or Area Director cannot > >> judge rough consensus if they are unsure if the portion of the > >> population that is representing a dissenting view is one person > >> or many different people. This is especially true when there > >> are a large number of silent observers. > > > > Frankly, it strikes me as somewhat odd that a body acting as a > > standards-setting organization with public impact might allow any > > technical decision on its specifications to be driven by people > > operating under a cloak of anonymity. Expressing an anonymous voice? > > No problem. Influencing determination of a consensus with public > > impact? That should not be allowed, IMO. > >What if the pseudonymous voice raise a valid technical concern, provide >useful text for a specification, or even co-author a specification? > >I think decisions should be based on technically sound arguments. >Whether someone wants to reveal their real identity is not necessarily >correlated to the same person providing useful contributions. Raising a technical problem anonymously does not seem to be a concern. However, there could be significant IPR problems with anonymous solutions to technical problems. Russ _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf