Patrik Fältström wrote:
So I do not think IETF should be the slightest worried ISOC is doing something here without coordination. And without visibility to the IETF.
I don't know about anyone else, but I wasn't expressing worry. I was noting that the activity wasn't discussed with the broader IETF beforehand and that such a discussion before making strategic decisions can be useful. I'll stress again that I'm not crazy enough to think that the IETF "plenary" should have a veto on ISOC choices, but merely that pro-active (pre-hoc, rather than post-hoc) discussion could be productive.
Brian E Carpenter wrote: > people I knew > who are experts in the identity management area never thought that > the IETF was relevant except as a source of atomic components. A significant -- and probably insightful -- assessment of the IETF... d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf