Dear All: I have received a reply from the Free Software Foundation as to why they directed comments to this list. The last call (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg05617.html) instructs the public to contact this mailing list in order to express their comments. In light of that, I can see how the FSF considered it reasonable to send public comments this way. Most notably: "The IESG is considering approving this draft as a standards track RFC. The IESG solicits final comments on whether the IETF community has consensus to publish draft-housley-tls-authz-extns as a proposed standard. Comments can be sent to ietf at ietf.org or exceptionally to iesg at ietf.org. Comments should be sent by 2009-02-11." If the intent wasn't to solicit these kinds of responses, the wording of last calls may need to be amended in the future, and clarified so that exactly what is meant by "comments" and if they should actually be sent to this list. However, unless an alternative avenue was given it may degrade the reason why last calls are publicized to begin with. Even if this situation has happened before, the wording of last calls does seem to imply that comments are encouraged for the purpose of determining consensus. Given that, it seems unfair to have chastised these people for having done what the message last Call was asking them to do, even if the people making said comments may not have been fully versed on the subject. Hopefully, now that dialog is opened up and the suggestions given to me to pass to the FSF have been received, they can go through one of those avenues. But last calls, if they're not meant to encourage the kind of response that occurred, should probably be reworded if there is an alternative place for them to make statements. Sincerely, Alex Loret de Mola _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf