Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > 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. What kind of problems? /Simon _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf