Please see in line below.
Regards,
Malcolm
| Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx 29/09/2011 09:18 AM |
|
A few more thoughts on this thread.
> All,
>
> I propose to completely remove section 5 of this draft.
>
> The reason:
>
> The IETF should *NOT* document any comment on any "multiple standards"
> developed by other SDOs which are outside of the IETF's scope.
>
> Especially standards like like SONET/SDH, CDMA/GSM.
>
> The current text reflects the author's impressions, and since I don't
> believe that the authors were involved in the debates when these
> standards were developed, they *DO NOT KNOW ENOUGH* to comment
> authoritatively on them.
Why do you suddenly think that it is important for only people with knowledge of a topic to contribute to standards? Where does that leave the ITU-T's input on MPLS? I can give you many examples of where people who had no qualification as "experts" in a particular field have contributed to standards, but I will refrain from doing so so as to not "offend other SDOs" as you say below. 8)
[MB] This individual draft is now in IETF last call. At this stage it should represent the opinion of those who are experts in the field. Clearly during the development of a draft all interested participants, expert or not, should provide input.
>
> Best regards, Huub.
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf